It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Real Talk about White Privilege

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by dollmonster

Now think about what that implies. Do poor whites get AA? Do poor whites get the same social tolerance for their status, making excuses for their unemployment, unwed Welfare mothers, illegal drug use and other crime. HELL NO! These people are universally viewed as white trash.


And there is one of the main problems when AA is discussed: AA is equated to non-white.

What is often IGNORED is that AA applies to WOMEN! This is why white women have benefitted the most from AA than any other minority group. But of course, AA is code for black, just like ghetto, welfare, inner-city, and disadvantaged areas are.



White people as a whole, are far from privileged. Historically, their poor have been just as exploited and abused as any other group by those in power. The elitists are a very small minority, yet somehow because many are white, the entire white race gets grouped together with them, blamed for their sins and made the scapegoats.


Don't make me laugh. Not sure if you meant in America, but I mean in America. Whites as a whole have reaped the fat of the land in America; it is a JOKE to say otherwise. If white Americans are far from privileged, who is the privileged group? Please.

As Chris Rock said, if white people are losing, who the hell's winning?




posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:18 PM
link   
I'd respond to you, BH, but all you did was use a whole lot of words to say nothing, not to mention call me a liar. Your calling me "truthseeka" says it all. Too bad I didn't coin the term "white privilege," but take your shots, nevertheless. Just use less words next time.




posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
You forgot the most important privilege of the blacks, the ability to scream race in any case and have it blown out of proportion. Duke case anyone?


Indeed, you're right.

Women should not be taken seriously whenever they claim someone has raped them. Black women should DEFINITELY be ignored, as they cannot separate race from rape. While we're at it, let's get rid of that life imprisonment crap for rape.

Tsk tsk tsk, 1 letter differs between the words and black women STILL can't understand that. You've enlightened me, Rock.

(HarlemHottie, Ceci, and any other black women on these boards...hell, EVERY woman on these boards, note the constant sarcasm in this post)



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Slop eating police? Your ignorance and immaturity shine through and through. You are disgusting.


I call them pigs, you call them law enforcement officers. Tomato, to-MAH-to.


Guess that makes me disgusting, huh? Fine with me. Personally, I find someone who supports white privilege disgusting...but that's just me.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
That it does. Where do the racist posters come from anymore? .. Man.. seems like a sudden rush of them over the past few months. Truthseeka it would be best to bring about your arguments in a more mature and .. adultly fashioned way.. other wise in my eyes you are nothing more then a bigoted racist.


Hey, that's more creative than disgusting!


I should be more mature...guess you're right. I should minimalize rape allegations to playing that good ole race card. I see. Clearly more mature than using terms from my lexicon that differ from the lexicon of others to reference a noun. Gotcha. I'll keep that in mind.


YOU should keep in mind that posting lies about other members is frowned upon here. You see, my use of a pig-related term to describe police is NOT racist, yet you called me a ra...no, a BIGOTED racist. Very nice. I won't call you what you are, though, based on this post...just say that it probably rhymes with "fire."



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:36 PM
link   
Dollmonster...

I don't know what all happened with your son. But, the only thing that makes sense is that you left something out of the story.

Let's face it, felonies are not just handed down for fistfights. IMO, your son used some type of weapon and was the only one to do so, or he is trained in boxing/other martial arts, thus making his use of his hands and/or feet the use of a lethal weapon. That's the only thing that makes sense to me.

It's good to hear that he overcame this felony conviction. I have a friend trying to get his felony reduced to a misdemeanor; he has already spent 3 grand trying. Felonies are NOT what you want to have marking you forever.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:38 PM
link   
This is LUDICRUS ... NOT ONE time NOT ONE SINGLE TIME HAVE I EVER EVER EVER BEEN Picked for something over any other RACE ... ANY OTHER COLOR OR BECAUSE SOMEONE IS GAY OR NO GAY. Now maybe I have been picked because I was a MALE ... and not a FEMALE .... NOW THAT I CAN POSSIBLY BELIEVE BUT WHITE/GREEN/ORANGE/PURPLE/ ... # this BULL # that you guys are trying to make relative because it is NOT relative ... Well at least not for me and I am 23 years old ... and have never felt/any sort of pressure besides for some of the Black CLICK's at my school when I was in High School they felt like they had to run in groups ... or some stupid stuff like that ... There were 5 people that died while I was in high school .. One black male 19 ... went into a guys house and killed him ... He is now dead himself ... So that iss two of the five ... there was two that got into accidents and died from Drinking and driving and one ... Died from a car falling on him ... INteresting you say ... I say .. HELL no it's not interesting it is FACTS ... FACTS ARE FACTS ... Black people are irrational at BEST .... Especially whenever they get thier feelings hurt ... Aweeeee ... POOOR PEOPLE ... Let's cry and blame our ancestors f- up ... Why you think that they never made boats and ventured out back in the day ... ... Why you think their ancestors are still living in huts and not progressing with the rest of the world. I think I am becoming a Racist the more information that I get from all the research I am doing. I think I just need to go on each person I meet as an individual which has never lead me wrong any where. Although I have figured out there are Many more peopel out there I would have cared to never have met there are those few and far between that Aren't liars, thiefs, and Cheats. Whether they be White(Crackers), Black(Niggers), or Mexican(Wet Backs) .... They are all my friends ... and no matter what you as a "PEOPLE" say to me ... I will always TELL YOU ... I have my NIGRO friends and Well I would never tell my mexican friends they are wet backs ... because that is referring them to the way people live over in Mexico ... Even tho ... Piedras Negras is off the chain ... It is just an Insult to thier Ancestors. Sayig that they had to Swim the River to get here ... But I could joke with them about it ... Although it would not be like going to one of my white black or mexican friends and saying ... What it do Niger !?!? anyways .. most of you will never understand this because you are so caught up in Words that you are not able to actually communicate the way that we were meant to communicate MUCH MUCH FURTHER then just words but speak to each others hearts and realize that we are ALL STUCK HERE TOGETHER !


Originally posted by truthseeka

Originally posted by Wildbob77
The thing that I disagree with about the whole white Privlege concept is that it becomes an excuse for failure. The cards are stacked against you if you are black because of something that is invisible, that can't be measured and in my mind is just an academic construct.


I disagree with this.

White privilege is not so much about holding blacks back as it is about elevating whites. The odds being against blacks is part of it, but not central to it.

As for your notion that WP is used to excuse failure, let me stray a bit and ask you something. What do you say of times in history when blacks WERE indeed held back, despite trying to make it in America? The former sharecroppers who, after working and starting to come up, were run back to the plantations with GUNS is one example. Black Wall Street is another. All-black towns, with the citizens actually making something of themselves, that were burned to the ground are other examples.

I agree with some of the possible solutions you offered for the poor. However, do you REALLY think the poor, of any race, want to be poor?



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by wagnerian21
Anyone can arrange anything they want. This is not indicative of any sort of 'priviledge'; rather, it`s called free will.


Not true.

Whites who want to avoid non-whites can do this with relative ease. Non-whites who wish to do this cannot. They MUST interact with white people on some level every day if they want to have money in America.



If one wishes to move, they would need to choose an area that fits both criteria. This is called 'economics'. It has nothing to do with bias.


This is not true. A non-white who has the money to live in an affluent neighborhood may choose not to do so if the whites in this area are not welcoming. So, they would like to live there, but they choose not to because of the neighbors.



Logical fallacy; this statement is structured so as to convey the assertion that the existance of 'systemic racism' is an undeniable fact. This is nothing more than an underhanded attempt at indoctrination.




Systemic racism is not a fact? Tell that to someone who's gullible...



The author is leading the respondant with a heavily weighted question.


I disagree. One can look at how often blacks who talk about racism are "playing the race card" to see this. Blacks apparently cannot talk about racism without being self-serving in their discussion; whites apparently are the only ones who can.



McIntosh saves the most loaded and leading question for last; the author is playing with the emotions of the respondant and allowing any sort of concievable example to be brought up and then reduced to fit into the equation of 'systemic racism'.


Biggest disagreement yet. The "norm" is defined as being white America, and everyone is NOT welcome in all aspects of white America. There are too many examples of not feeling a sense of belonging to list here.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 02:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by shooterbrody
Systematic racism" is a fact? Gee I thought that the civil rights movement got rid of that. Were laws not enacted to make that behavior illegal?




Riiight. I guess you missed the 2000 presidential elections. You know...voter disenfranchise? Which could NOT have happened, according to you, since the Voting Rights Act of 1965 banned this.

You know full well that laws are NOT always followed...and those who tossed the mostly black, poor, poor/black votes in Florida have not been punished.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 03:32 PM
link   
So TS,

According to your own words....

It is perfectly acceptable for you to call me a "Pig" because of my profession..

but

You can not be called a racist even though your words indicate you are?

Hypocrisy at it's best..

Semper



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 03:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka

Originally posted by wagnerian21
Anyone can arrange anything they want. This is not indicative of any sort of 'priviledge'; rather, it`s called free will.


Not true.

Whites who want to avoid non-whites can do this with relative ease. Non-whites who wish to do this cannot. They MUST interact with white people on some level every day if they want to have money in America.

SHOW ME THIS !!!!!!!!!!!!! SHOW ME THIS !!!!!!!!!!!!! SHOW ME THIS !!!!!!!!!!!!! SHOW ME THIS !!!!!!!!!!!!! SHOW ME THIS !!!!!!!!!!!!! You saying this shows how oblivious you truly are to what is really going on in the world.


If one wishes to move, they would need to choose an area that fits both criteria. This is called 'economics'. It has nothing to do with bias.


This is not true. A non-white who has the money to live in an affluent neighborhood may choose not to do so if the whites in this area are not welcoming. So, they would like to live there, but they choose not to because of the neighbors.
And what about WHITE-WHITE's that want to live in that area but are treated a certain way by thier neighbors just because thier families haven't lived next to them for 20 years. Would that make a White-White family move or would ... I would personally take it as a responsibility to break down those walls if it were me ... Unless the person next door was coming outside with his CREW ... and Making Idol threats to me ... Flashing pistols or what not ... But we are talking about a neighborhood where the homes range from 500,000++ why am I having a prblem seeing these threats taking place ???


Logical fallacy; this statement is structured so as to convey the assertion that the existance of 'systemic racism' is an undeniable fact. This is nothing more than an underhanded attempt at indoctrination.




Systemic racism is not a fact? Tell that to someone who's gullible...
You are the gullible one letting yourself believe that there is Systemic RACISM ... GO to South Africa and tell them that there ... To the White-White people ... Go to Syrbia and tell that to the Lebonese ... then we will see what Systematic Racism is ... IDIOT !


The author is leading the respondant with a heavily weighted question.


I disagree. One can look at how often blacks who talk about racism are "playing the race card" to see this. Blacks apparently cannot talk about racism without being self-serving in their discussion; whites apparently are the only ones who can.
Yes ... this is so true I see white people talking about how many White's made it into the Oscars ... or how many have won .. As apposed lost ... Or what about the last white basketball player to get into the Hall of fame ... Hmmmmm .. Or what about the Percentages there ... Think it has anything to do with Pure Talent ?? Or just the fact that it is a RACE thing !??!?!? Hmmmmmmmmmm .... I know there is some rascial tension there simply because my new Father-n-law won't even watch it .. because there are to many blacks oposed to whites ... Don't get me wrong there are Racist out there .. but ... the are far and few between .. and Usually 95% of the time stick to themselves and a Black person would never even be around these people because they go out of thier way to stay away from places like Wal-Mart ... and so forth



McIntosh saves the most loaded and leading question for last; the author is playing with the emotions of the respondant and allowing any sort of concievable example to be brought up and then reduced to fit into the equation of 'systemic racism'.


BY ALL MEANS List what you THINK is an example ... I really am insterested in this ... and by the way what someone told you is not a good example I want personal LIFE EXPERIENCES ....

Biggest disagreement yet. The "norm" is defined as being white America, and everyone is NOT welcome in all aspects of white America. There are too many examples of not feeling a sense of belonging to list here.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 03:36 PM
link   
This was FICTION or some IDEALISTIC opinion ... And was not a FACT ... SHOW ME .... if it was ... And what about the STupid Mayor Funeeling funds in N.Orleans and saying stupid stuff that was just not needed ... Do I need to go there ? with his Chocolate City .... INSERTWORDHERE Chocolate ..



Originally posted by truthseeka

Originally posted by shooterbrody
Systematic racism" is a fact? Gee I thought that the civil rights movement got rid of that. Were laws not enacted to make that behavior illegal?




Riiight. I guess you missed the 2000 presidential elections. You know...voter disenfranchise? Which could NOT have happened, according to you, since the Voting Rights Act of 1965 banned this.

You know full well that laws are NOT always followed...and those who tossed the mostly black, poor, poor/black votes in Florida have not been punished.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 04:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka
A non-white who has the money to live in an affluent neighborhood may choose not to do so if the whites in this area are not welcoming. So, they would like to live there, but they choose not to because of the neighbors.


Emphasis added. Choice. We all have a choice. Your choice is not my responsibility. And to blame your choice on someone else is the epitome of a Victim Mindset.

In this world today, many people are "not welcoming" to other people. It doesn't necessarily have anything to do with race. Unless you choose to make it so.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 04:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka

Originally posted by jsobecky
Slop eating police? Your ignorance and immaturity shine through and through. You are disgusting.


I call them pigs, you call them law enforcement officers. Tomato, to-MAH-to.


Guess that makes me disgusting, huh? Fine with me. Personally, I find someone who supports white privilege disgusting...but that's just me.



Originally posted by semperfortis
So TS,

According to your own words....

It is perfectly acceptable for you to call me a "Pig" because of my profession..

but

You can not be called a racist even though your words indicate you are?

Hypocrisy at it's best..

Semper

No, semper. I believe he's calling you a "to-MAH-to".


But he's allowed to, because that's part of his BLACK PRIVILEGE.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 08:57 PM
link   


You know full well that laws are NOT always followed...and those who tossed the mostly black, poor, poor/black votes in Florida have not been punished.


I remember seeing alot of old white rich people who were "confused" by those ballots in florida.

Wasn't this thread about 'white privilege'?But you'll probably say you can't separate the economic issue in 'this case'.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 09:39 PM
link   
White privelege is what happens when whites beat everyone at discovering: America, calculus, thermodynamic laws, diesel/gas engines, contact process, wet process, coal technology, oil, oil refining, plastics, foams, rubbers, fibers, dyes, pigments, medicines, electronics, geology, etc.



posted on Feb, 27 2007 @ 11:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by truthseeka





Logical fallacy; this statement is structured so as to convey the assertion that the existance of 'systemic racism' is an undeniable fact. This is nothing more than an underhanded attempt at indoctrination.




Systemic racism is not a fact? Tell that to someone who's gullible...


I`m ignoring the rest of truthseeka`s post because it`s generally composed of irrelevant information (he seems to have become upset at one point for someone referring to him as 'truthseeka', which is his own username. Very odd.), or a repetition of points I`ve already responded to, but I wanted to bring this particular segment of his post to the attention of the gallery.

This one response is totally illustrative of the mentality of the majority of people who espouse the 'white priviledge' theory; moreso, it`s the one major rhetorical technique they use to gain the upper hand in the argument. You`ll notice a few things about the statement "Tell that to someone who's gullible."

A) It serves to close debate by establishing the theory of 'white priviledge' as an a priori fact and beyond questioning. This is more or less another logical fallacy, insofar as it takes the subject and removes it from the rigors of intellectual discussion.

B) It serves as an attack on the listener; by laughing and inferring that the theory of 'white priviledge' is an established fact, it embarasses anyone who may be listening and yet to reach a final conclusion on the topic- no one likes to be laughed at or made to feel stupid.

Basically, it works like this: '2+2=4' is a fact generally considered unquestionable. It`s an objectively true statement. Someone saying "I have yet to come to a final conclusion regarding the value of 2+2." would thus generally be considered a bit dense, and may recieve some well-deserved laughter. Saying "White priviledge is the foundation of modern American society" is not an unquestionable truth, but by subjecting someone questioning the theory of 'white priviledge' to the same level of derision, the speaker equates the objective validity of the two ideas.

Don`t ever let anyone shut down your thought process or your ability to ask questions by laughing at you. As long as the questions are valid, you deserve respect, not derision.



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic


I suppose there may be monocultural enclaves remaining somewhere in this country; offhand, though, I couldn`t list them.


That's the thing. There ARE monocultural enclaves (I like the way you talk, mister!) still existing in the US, but they're few and far between. More and more, the actual 'melting' of the cultures here is taking place.

I see more and more blacks (and affluent blacks) on TV as well as in RL.


I suppose the issue at hand is that it`s irrelevant to me, probably due to my Objectivist/Libertarian outlook- if someone from ANY ethnic group wants to sit there and avoid anyone else from any other given group, yippie for him. Who cares? He isn`t hurting me, he isn`t hurting anyone else. He isn`t breaking any laws. Therefore I never really expended any mental energy considering the concept that someone might want to live that way.




I`d imagine it would be rather difficult for anyone to arrange the details of his or her life anymore to avoid a person of any given racial background with any degree of confidence in achieving that goal.


My point was that if it was desired, and depending how important it was to an individual, it could be done. I don't see the benefit, however.


Neither do I. But again, I`m not one to tell people they can`t do something, either, unless they`re hurting someone else by doing it.

Now if they`re actively discriminating against someone else in employment, housing, whatever- that IS hurting someone else, so it`s a different thing.



In many of these discussions, I've seen an apparent effort to remove other factors from the discussion. For example, wealth is a huge factor in race discussions. It's also a factor in a discussion of discrimination. As are religion, gender and sexual orientation. But when I've brought them up, I get reminded that we're talking about race here. And it's my opinion that we can't ignore these other aspects and get an overall ACCURATE understanding of the racial and cultural experience here in the US.

We all know that racism is alive and well. But to omit the other aspects or culture in these United States distorts the big picture. We can talk about race alone, but to get an accurate idea of the benefits of this "White Privilege", I think it's only fair to include other aspects. Here's why:



She was thinking of racial discrimination in housing, and the subtle inference is 'whites have it easy'. Which is the subtle assertion that the whole theory of 'white priviledge' is built from. And it just ain`t the case.


I'm getting the impression that some people think that
"white privilege" = "whites have it easy" = "ALL whites have it easier than ALL blacks" = "It's better to be white than black"
And that's simply inaccurate. And everyone should be aware of that. There are so many other factors to consider. And that's too simplistic a formula to believe to be the truth.


Exactly. But one of the questions I`m asking is why it is that, when those other factors get brought up, invariably the person who mentions them gets shouted down by people who don`t want to hear about sexism, homophobia, or religious bigotry. Is one form of bigotry 'worse' than another form?

If I get locked out of buying an apartment because I happen to be a white person, is that less eggregious an offense against me than would be if someone from another ethnic background were locked out of buying an apartment because of his or her background?

If someone gets denied for a job because he or she 'wasn`t the right color', is that worse than someone being locked out of a job than for some other bigoted reason? Is it less bad than someone who was locked out of a job because they weren`t the 'right color'- in the eyes of the AA requirements?

I tend to think active, offensive bigotry is bigotry, regardless of the circumstances.



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 12:30 AM
link   
Oh, and to Benevolent Heretic- my apologies for not quoting your post in full; I was bunping up against the word limit.
If there`s anything I missed that you want to expand on, please let me know.



posted on Feb, 28 2007 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by wagnerian21

Originally posted by truthseeka


Logical fallacy; this statement is structured so as to convey the assertion that the existance of 'systemic racism' is an undeniable fact. This is nothing more than an underhanded attempt at indoctrination.


Systemic racism is not a fact? Tell that to someone who's gullible...


< snip >

This one response is totally illustrative of the mentality of the majority of people who espouse the 'white priviledge' theory; moreso, it`s the one major rhetorical technique they use to gain the upper hand in the argument. You`ll notice a few things about the statement "Tell that to someone who's gullible."

A) It serves to close debate by establishing the theory of 'white priviledge' as an a priori fact and beyond questioning. This is more or less another logical fallacy, insofar as it takes the subject and removes it from the rigors of intellectual discussion.

B) It serves as an attack on the listener; by laughing and inferring that the theory of 'white priviledge' is an established fact, it embarasses anyone who may be listening and yet to reach a final conclusion on the topic- no one likes to be laughed at or made to feel stupid.

Excellent points. As a personal observation, it takes no education at all to use these tactics, just a nasty? vindictive? personality. But it takes some sense to realize what game is being played here.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join