Debunking White Privilege

page: 7
12
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 10 2012 @ 10:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by Hefficide
reply to post by King_John
 


I agree that great disparity exists in the United States... my feeling is that it is no longer a racial issue - it is a class issue. Since the economy tanked most of my neighbors and friends have barely been getting by, have had to go on public assistance, have lost their cars, homes, etc... and most of them were white.

Racial wounds still exist in this nation, and I don't deny that at all. But I do beleve that we solve nothing by continuing to pick those scabs. We are all onboard a sinking ship right now.... we can either work together to bail water and survive... or we can discuss or differences and sink.

~Heff

Heff, no question you do see things for what they are.......We all hate people who are poorer than we are.
Black and white was over with years ago.
A guy who makes 500k a year does not want to hang out with someone who lives on 40k a year....color of that person be damned.
I only make about 45k a year, and I will state very honestly that I have no one in the 20k bracket that I call my friend, nor do I have anyone in the 200k bracket that I call my friend. We don't mind working together at our jobs, but the minute I punch the time clock our relationship ends. and I am ok with that.
There was a time when I knew people who had money. We would be sitting around partying and one of them would get an idea of going someplace for the weekend, like Vegas. Come on Ron lets go to Vegas for the weekend. Then I would have to convince them that there is no way in hell I could afford to just run off to Vegas like that.
Before too long they just stopped asking, and not too long after that we just stopped hanging out.
And I am guilty of the same. I would say Lets go out to dinner, and my less well off friends would not be able to afford that...and the situation repeats itself.
No sir it is not race that drives us apart anymore.......and I am ok with that






posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 08:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
reply to post by James1982
 

The issue is not that you cannot understand, its that you do not try to understand. Like all you've done is complain about ways you are disadvantaged, right? While expressing no empathy or granting credence to complaints of any other groups. You keep jumping to this place where you're like, "i'm white and I have it just as hard as you." While not making an effort to understand anything. Which is just extremely irritating.


The most basic idea of "white privilege" is that there are a number of things that white people don't have to deal with. Would you agree with that statement? So by demonstrating how white people DO have to deal with such things, it's showing that white privilege, in the way people see it, just doesn't exist today. Not anymore than Black privilege, or Asian privilege, or Indian privilege, etc do.

THAT is why I bring up these things, NOT to get sympathy. This isn't a "Poor me I have to deal with discrimination" thread. If you are under the assumption that's what this is you are just wrong, there is no other way to say it. Such things are brought up to demonstrate that white people ALSO have to deal with these problems. Make sense?

You say I need to open my mind and understand other people. I understand them as much as anyone who isn't actually in their shoes can. I am not denying that minorities have to deal with discrimination. I am not denying that minorities have struggles to endure and battles to fight. What I AM denying is that white people are immune from these problems, because they aren't. By demonstrating that white people also have to fight battles and deal with the issues of daily life I show the similarities between us and not the differences.

Instead of saying "OMG I can't get band-aids that match my skin color!" I say "All of us, regardless of skin color, still get cuts and scrapes" I could understand why you are under the impression I started this thread as a bitchfest about all the problems us poor poor white people have. But you couldn't be any farther than the truth. As I said at the beginning of this post, the subject of this thread is white privilege. White privilege means there are things that whites don't have to deal with. I show whites DO in fact have to deal with these things, therefore white privilege is bunk.

Are there some specific things that minorities deal with that whites don't? Absolutely. But there are also things that blacks deal with that Asians don't. Or things Asians deal with that Hispanics don't. Or things whites deal with that blacks don't. Unfortunately because of our skin color we do have slightly different life experiences. But in no way, shape, or form does that mean being white grants you a profound universal advantage currently in the USA.

Claiming that it does is also claiming two additional things. It's claiming that successful white people did NOT get there because of their hard work, skill, effort, time, etc. You are saying they cheated and don't deserve what they have. You are also claiming that poor and lower class, non successful white people are even more stupid, lazy, and unmotivated than a minority of a similar economic or social level because even with the golden pathway set out before them they still weren't able to succeed.

If you can't see how that's wrong, then we will just have to agree to disagree. But at least you can't question the logic used to arrive at that conclusion. You either think there IS white privilege, successful whites are undeserving and didn't work for it, and unsuccessful whites are particularly lazy, stupid, and unmotivated. OR you believe that it no longer exists, and white people's success level is dictated by the same factors as everyone else: hard work, skill, intelligence, luck, money, and connections.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 08:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tiger5
reply to post by James1982
 


And that my friend is entertainment! You also forget that Oprah Winfrey was one of the most watched black entertainers on the TV.

However does that prevent white privelidge.

I will ask you again if white racists exist do they not promulgate white privelidge? If you look at Page 4 you will see my first post?

It would be great if people sought to sold the problem of racism rather than than perfoming the gymnastics of denial at all cost.



Yes, I am talking about entertainment there. What's the problem? My OP was me replying individually to all 50 statements made from the article I linked to about white privilege. One of the statements was that minorities are not fairly represented on television or something similar to that. I replied to this statement by saying they are, in fact, represented quite well on TV. That reply was meant to address that specific statement from the article and nothing more.

Does that prevent white privilege? That's kind of a confusing question in the way it's phrased. PART of white privilege, according to the author of the article, is that whites are over-represented in media. I showed how that is NOT true. So yes, it kind of does.

As for the rest of your post, yes, there are white racists and if these people are in a position of power they are able to influence things positively for whites and negatively for other races. You are forgetting that there are also racist people in all racial groups, and people of all racial groups in positions of power. Either in my OP or one of my proceeding posts I shared the story of the manager that refused to hire whites, or any other race other than Asians for that matter. So that's proof that white people are also dealing with discrimination, just as minority groups are.

For something to be considered white privilege it would have to be some sort of advantage that ONLY white people receive, or some sort of hurdle or disadvantage that ONLY minorities deal with. Racist people in positions of power covers all races, not just whites or minorities. therefore it cannot possibly be white privilege. Do you follow the logic I'm using here? I'm pretty bad at explaining things so feel free to ask me to further clarify if you aren't getting it.

So far in this thread I've had to reply to people who are either assuming I'm saying something that I'm not, or just flat out don't understand the point I'm trying to make. I'll try to explain things in more detail from here on out to avoid any further confusion.

I too agree that we need to solve the problem of racism. People should be judged by their actions and personality and not their skin color. That is the most basic concept that people need to accept in order to fix this problem. All I can do to fight racism is to follow this myself, which I do.

Then you accuse me of denying racism and discrimination. This shows you are not understanding what I'm getting at. I am not denying that racism and discrimination against minorities exists, it most certainly does. What I'm denying is that white people are immune from any negative aspects of race relations. Whites have to deal with all the same problems as minorities do on one level or another.

Again, like I said before. I'm trying to demonstrate the ways we are alike (the various issues that we face) instead of focusing on the things that make us different.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 08:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tiger5


Please ask Pete Wilson. The demographics in the 80 were such as you make the official state language to be spanish but he vetoed it.

I am fine with that.

Granted that America is still the land of opportunity to many who would come over here and not make reasonable attempt to learn the language. Please submit relevant statistics to support your inference.

Even if you deliberatley ignore my previous coments I will continue to engage with your misconceptions

kind Regards

Tiger5


Please believe me when I say I am not purposely failing to reply to anything you say. I am perfectly willing to address any point you bring up. This thread is getting quite long, and I have a TON of replies to make. If I failed to reply to a couple of your comments I apologize, and if you re-post specifically what you would like me to reply to I'd gladly address it.

I am a bit confused however at what statistics you are requesting. Statistics that show there are immigrants that don't know English? I'm going off personal experience on that one, and I know you can't be denying that there are immigrants that don't speak a lick of English.

If you specify what statistics you wish me to provide I'll gladly do so.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by BASSPLYR
reply to post by James1982
 


Actually we've reconnected since as adults. One good thing facebook has ever done for me. Man she is an accomplished woman these days. Almost to the point describing my job which is pretty sweet is embarrassing. In the end even though we reconnected as adults we did't work out and have kept the relationship at friend level. But yeah it was obvious racism. As a young teen I simply couldn't understand why I couldn't be her boyfriend simply because I was white. At the time I was envolved heavily in the asian community. Her dad knew that. Heck he used to see me assisting my sensei at the local martial arts demonstrations. I even spoke a little bit of mandarin and knew a lot about their culture and customs. Even all of that was not enough to make me acceptable as a boyfriend for her dad. It is what it is. But it was racism against me due to my skin color.


Congrats on getting her back even if it's just as a friend. Too bad things couldn't have gone further (assuming you still wanted that) but it is what it is. Thankfully race has never been an issue with any of my girlfriends (2 Asian women, one recent Mexican immigrant, and a half-black girl back in high school are the only non-white women I've been with) but obviously there are still people out there too stuck in their old way who refuse to support who their children love for something as silly as skin color.

I really hope it's just the older generation that's like this and once they're gone and we take their place things will be better, but I still worry. Generational indoctrination is still strong in many places so I'm sure there will always be some pockets of hate that refuse to accept change, as unfortunate as it is.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tiger5
Capitlaism is a white invention.



That's just silly, and reeks of anti-white propaganda when you also say that Capitalism has a role in racism and discrimination.

The core principals of Capitalism came from the merchants of old. North African and Middle Eastern merchants to be exact. That's hardly white. And I fail to see how Capitalism has any sort of mechanism that would support racism or discrimination. The ideals of Capitalism have nothing to do with race and could be practiced by a county of any race, or mixed race. Oppressing and taking advantage of people in GENERAL is another story, capitalism definitely has it's negative aspects if left unregulated that can result in the rape of resources and the destruction of people's lives. But again this has zero relation to race at all.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Charmed707
Why would you label those aspects as "white privilege"? It's simply minority disadvantage (if you choose to view it in a negative way). Minorities of ANY country face things such as not seeing as many of themselves in the media, in history books, or while out in public. Whites are NOT the majority in most countries and are a global minority. So why single out white people? As for makeup and hair care, I always see a plethora of products for every skin tone and hair texture and I live in a majority white town. If you go to a predominately black area, pretty much every local hair salon caters to black hair care needs.

If white racism and oppression is such a huge hurdle for non-whites, then why do so many of them flock to majority-white countries? Immigrants are constantly CHOOSING to be a minority, as well as choosing that for their descendents.. I couldn't imagine choosing to move to a country with a non-white majority and then whine about being a minority and the disadvantages (again-depends on perception) that go along with it. The only people who didn't choose to come here are slaves.

None of those in this thread who disagree have addressed the point of Asian success. Their superior success alone debunks the myth of 'white privilege'.
edit on 8/9/2012 by Charmed707 because: (no reason given)


Thanks for addressing that issue.

There are two aspects of the supposed white privilege. There are the trivial things that you mentioned such as products and services that are targeted at the majority of the country for obvious business reasons. These issues are not related to race at all, it's just a simple numbers game. A company is going to make more money selling a product or providing a service that appeals to the largest group of people in a given market. That's white people in the USA. This however doesn't provide any sort of advantage or privilege to whites, and it's not based on discrimination, it's just simple business.

The second aspect is the specific racial issues. The idea that there are white people who will discriminate against minority groups, therefore providing the whites in this country with an advantage or privilege over minorities. THIS is the only aspect of any importance. White it's (unfortunately) true that there are whites in the US that will discriminate against minorities and make it harder for them and easier for whites, the opposite is also true. There are in fact Blacks, Asians, Mexicans, etc that discriminate against whites, therefore giving those minority groups the advantage in those circumstances and making it harder for whites.

Just like I've said several times already in this thread, considering the issue of discrimination applies to ALL sides of the various races, it cannot possibly be only a white privilege, or only discrimination against minorities.

I also appreciate you pointing out the example of Asians. The people here who are trying to prove white privilege DOES exist are using statistics that basically demonstrate overall that white people have more good things going for them, and minorities have more bad things going for them. But these statistics betray them. If white privilege was the cause of the discrepancy between the races, then Asians would not be able to excel to the level that they have.

So then what's the answer? Well, in my opinion white people aren't given any sort of significant advantage over any other races. When you divide people up by any sort of criteria (race in this case) some are going to do better while others do worse) and this is exactly what we see.

If we divided up people by their height, the color of their hair, the color of their shirts, their weight, the month they were born in, whether they have cats or dogs, or ANY other number of various criteria instead of race you would see the exact same thing. you would see that certain groups do better than other groups.

Either dog owners do better or cat owners do better. You can't have it both ways, one has to come out on top. If cat owners came out on top in all the stats it doesn't mean that there is "cat owner privilege" and that people who own cats have an unfair advantage over people that have other pets. To prove cat owner privilege you'd have to demonstrate something unique to cat owners that doesn't apply to dog owners. Just like to prove white privilege you have to prove something specific to whites or minorities independent of statistics. Which nobody can.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 09:56 AM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal


First of all, why would you even start a thread, call it debunking white privilege, and then give simplistic not well thought out rebuttals? That defeats the purpose of having this type of discourse which is why I felt like I may have been wasting my time responding to it. But anyway, here goes.


I gave simplistic rebuttals because the claims made by the author in the first place were very simplistic. Some were a bit more fleshed out if I felt I needed to explain something better. But if the author says "whites don't ever have to deal with discrimination" I don't need a long winded reply. All I have to say is "No, your wrong, because whites DO have to deal with discrimination"

Seem reasonable? I think calling it "debunking" is fitting, going back to the same example I just used, if the author says "Whites don't have to deal with discrimination" that's bunk, it's a lie, it's wrong information. So my rebuttal is a debunk. No 10 paragraph essay required. I'm assuming people will use common sense, common knowledge, and logic when reading through my rebuttals. When I say that discrimination against whites DOES take place I really don't feel sources or proof is needed. Everybody knows discrimination takes place against every single racial group, religious group, gender, age, anything.

I don't think my choice of OP format defeats the purpose of this type of discourse. It's a jumping off point. If there is a specific rebuttal you agree with or don't wish to have further discussion about you leave it alone. If there is one that you DO wish to discuss further you can quote it, and then delve deeper into that specific issue. With 50 points being raised by the author that's a lot of material to go over if we are going to deeply explore and go back and fourth on each and every one. The way I chose to do this thread allowed anybody to explore specific points without having to sift through an OP that was 10 pages long. People can go at their own pace and deal with only the specific issues they want to.

I'm pretty sure you are able to tell by the length of my many posts in this thread that I'm prepared and willing to discuss any of these subjects at depth. I figured it would be better to start off with a simple concise OP and then fill it in more as people wanted.

edit on 11-8-2012 by James1982 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 10:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal


Whites are the majority in pretty much every profession in this country. The amount of minorities present in things like labor type jobs vary depending on where you live. This essay may be just as relevant to a labor job. This article may not have been addressing more professional type jobs, thats what I got from it though based on everything else she wrote. Plus, in the more modern era, they are the places where minorities typically report facing the most difficulties in the workplace, from what I have read. The emphasis is usually put on jobs that require a professional degree.



I won't disagree. But with whites being the extreme majority in this country it only makes sense that they will be the majority in most professions. For whites to have privilege, simply being white would have to give you an advantage from the get-go. With whites being the majority already, how is simply being another white guy/gal going to be an advantage? You'd have to claim that a large percentage of managers and/or HR departments are racists that don't want to hire minorities. Do you feel that is the case? This comes down to opinion as it's nearly impossible to prove one way or the other if the people hiring are discriminating.

Simply failing to hire a minority over a white person doesn't prove discrimination. Even if past experience is equal between the two, that still doesn't prove discrimination. The interview itself often dictates who will get the job more than experience does. How you present yourself, how you are dressed, how articulate you are all greatly affect your ability to be hired. Hell even some seemingly insignificant little thing like both the interviewee and the manager going to the same college could get the person a job, who knows.

So how can we say with any certainty that being white is of a substantial advantage in the professional job market, or on the flip side that being a minority is going to substantially hurt your chances of landing a professional job?

Because there are far more whites than other races in America all jobs are already, just by the number of people available, going to be dominated by whites. So what number would make you happy enough to say that minorities are not being discriminated against? If minorities were represented in all fields exactly at the same percentage as their population would indicate? What if by chance a certain minority just doesn't happen to be too interested in that specific career path?

What I'm trying to illustrate is that it's far too complex an issue to simply say "because blacks, hispanics, asians, and indians are not represented in every single job field at the exact same rate as they represent a percentage of the population as a whole, then it's a fact they are being discriminated against"

You just can't do that. There are too many factors. This being the case it's impossible to say that being white is of a substantial advantage in gaining employment over a minority.



posted on Aug, 11 2012 @ 12:46 PM
link   
reply to post by James1982
 


No You simply do not understand the idea of capitalism as an economic system. I am refering to capitalism as a comparatively modern economic and governing system. It is only 400 years old and was born on the back of slavery in the west.

You simply take one small sentence to rebut an entire argument? Wow!



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 02:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal


First, as I stated in the beginning, whites generally are the majority in every job nationwide. Do you see what you are advocating here though? People should ignore their skills and personal aspirations simply because they might have to deal with being the minority on the job. You really think thats ok? Wouldn't it make more sense have a more inclusive work environment?



I'm not advocating it, I'm showing that it's an option. If a person refuses to work any job unless everyone else there is their same race, then they have to make some choices about what's important in their life. Working with only their own race, or working at a place they want to and living the life they want to. Nobody is saying a Minority has to work only with other minorities. If THEY refuse to work with white people, they can do that, but then they'll have to live with the job where there are zero white people. That's nobody's fault but their own.

What exactly would make a workplace more inclusive? Or the better question I guess, what makes a work place with whites as the majority exclusive for minorities? Just because there are more white people there? As I've already mentioned several times I've worked many jobs where I was the minority. I didn't demand my employers make the workplace more inclusive for white people. That doesn't make sense. If your definition of being more inclusive is having more people of a certain race then that's something that you can't accomplish. Just hire a bunch of minorities to sit around so that the other ones will be more comfortable there?



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 02:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
reply to post by James1982
 


Originally posted by James1982


I turn on my TV and see minorities represented positively everywhere just like white people, and that's on regular stations. As much as white people? Absolutely not. Why would they be? They are minorities, that's the whole point. A minority will be represented less than a majority, because there are less of them.


No, that is absolutely false, lol. Minorities are not represented in the media at a number that matches the population of minorities in America. You only *think* they are because you are white.


According to the US Census Bureau for 2009 just over 65 percent of the population is white. Minorities, or people of color, make up just under 35 percent, with the percentage of Latinos in the US being 15.8 percent, of African Americans, 12.9 percent, and the third largest minority group, Asians, making up just under five percent of the American population. How many minorities are in the media? According to the American Screen Actors Guild, in 2008 of all television and theatrical roles, excluding animation, the percentage of different ethnic groups is as follows: Caucasian — 72.5 African American — 13.3 Latino — 6.4 Asian — 3.8 Native American — .3 For leading roles the percentage of Caucasian characters is higher and that of minority roles is lower for all minority groups. Comparing the numbers of the actual population to those of the people presented on screen, there is not enough diversity in the media. The ethnic group with the greatest disparity between the numbers in reality and those for television and film roles is the Latino population. Read more at Suite101: Are There Enough Images of Minorities in the US Media? | Suite101.com suite101.com...

Source



OK, so 65% of the population is white, and 72% of people represented in media are white. 7%? Really? You think a 7% difference is so incredible as to demonstrate a massive lack of fairness in media? Do you expect all the of percentages to be exactly equal to the population of that race? That's just an impossible goal.

A 7% different is definitely small enough to be accounted for by pretty much anything. Less minority actors WANTING to be in show business, less minority actors with the experience or skill for a specific show. 7% is tiny. If 90% of people in media were white then I'd totally agree with you, that's far too large of a difference compared to population figures. But honestly, 7% is an extremely small difference and you have zero evidence that 7% comes from any sort of discrimination or racism on the behalf of white people.

According to your stats black people are OVER represented just like white people. With 12.9% of the population being black and 13.3% in the media. So actually, if you are under the impression that representation in the media should match exactly the population figures, there should be LESS black people in media. There are too many of them, it's not fair, it's black people privilege at work.

At least I never want to hear another black person say there should be more blacks in the media, as we have proof right here they are already overrepresented. As blacks are overrepresented in media, blacks share the same privilege as white people, therefore white privilege in this instance is proved false by the stats you provided.

As far as minority-only TV there is Telemundo, BET, MundoFox, that come to mind immediately. I know there are others but I can't think of them right now. Either way, there are several minority-only TV channels, and you already showed with your own stats that the gap between representation and population is VERY small at only 7%, and certain minority groups such as blacks are OVER represented just as whites are, just to a smaller degree. So I can hardly understand how minorities are unfairly represented in media.

As far as the news goes, I don't watch that crap, so I cannot comment. But if you remember the whole Trayvon Martin thing, he (a black person) was presented over and over again as the innocent victim while his killer (multi-racial) was presented as only white, and as a "bad guy" that doesn't demonstrate ANY anti-minority bias to me whatsoever.
edit on 14-8-2012 by James1982 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal

Originally posted by James1982

I was also taught about george washington carver and the tuskegee airmen. Do you think a couple people contributed as much as millions and millions over a long period of time?


There are other people who contributed to the success of America, that should be mentioned that are not in the teaching of American history.



There are MILLIONS of people that contributed to the success of America. People of ALL races, who are NOT EVER mentioned in American history. So why are the minorities who are left out more important than the white people who are left out?



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 02:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tiger5
reply to post by James1982
 


No You simply do not understand the idea of capitalism as an economic system. I am refering to capitalism as a comparatively modern economic and governing system. It is only 400 years old and was born on the back of slavery in the west.

You simply take one small sentence to rebut an entire argument? Wow!


Not much that was built with slavery wasn't wiped out because of it. Look at the slave states, they where practically razed to the ground during the Civil War.

P.S What your looking for is Mercantilism, and Capitalism isn't a governing system.

I could go into what you clearly have no understanding of, but it is pointless to waste time on such people.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 03:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal



I'm not saying minorities get equal play in history class. Why should they? Are you saying that minorities have contributed equally to the formation of this country? The founding fathers were white, all presidents up until Obama was white, major military and political figures were white. Because the number of white people is vastly greater than that of other races, that means white people have a larger contribution to the US than other races, hence more coverage of white people in history classes.


Why should minorities get equal play in history classes? You cannot be serious. First of all not all white people are exceptional, the only ones that are mentioned did something special, right? Because if they did something exceptional that helped to form the nation it should be mentioned.Thats why influential minority figures, events, accomplishments should be mentioned. I'm talking about things that are omitted and overlooked. Also, not all the presidents were white and not all the major political figures were white.


What problem do you see with that? You can't falsely inflate the percentage of contributions made from minorities simply to make schools cover all races equally, how would that be right?


It would not be falsely inflating anything, it would be giving credit where credit is due. I'm NOT saying include non-stories


So you think American history should be taught with ALL races being represented at an equal percentage? 1/7th about whites, 1/7th about Native Americans,1/7th about blacks,1/7th about Asians,1/7th about actual Indians,1/7th about Hispanics,1/7th about Arabs?

What sense does that make? Your saying that white people only represent 1/7th of the contributions to American History?

I think American history should be taught without thought of the race of the people being mentioned. Think of all the most important and largest contributions to America. Then teach those. If fewer of those are minorities than so be it, that's just how it is. You would be artificially inflating the importance of minorities if every single race got equal mention compared to each other.

And who the heck said all white people are exceptional? Why do you insist on completely pulling things like this out of your arse? Your using a straw-man argument. You cannot just fabricate things that I say and then argue against them. Argue against what I actually say. And what I said is that whites contributed to this country more than minorities for the simple reason that there are MORE of them. It has nothing to do with any race being better than any other race. Here, I'll show you an example.

Say I have a group of scientists gathered together to invent a light speed engine. 70 of them are white, 10 of them are black, 10 of them are hispanic, and 10 of them are asian.

When history talks about these scientists, it's totally ridiculous to think that they should mention the different races equally. 25% of the discussion about the white ones, 25% discussion about the black ones, 25% discussion about the hispanic ones, and 25% discussion about the asian ones. You think that's how it should be done? How is that fair? Nearly 75% of the scientists were white, so why would they only get 25% of the discussion time when talking about the development of the light speed engine? And why would asians get discussed 25% of the time when they only represent 10% of the scientists involved? What makes sense about that at all?

Now apply that to history as it is. If the majority of the historical players were white, doesn't it only make sense the majority of history will talk about white people? How is there anything wrong with that?

You say minorities who did great things and have contributed to history should be mentioned. Yes. I have no problem with this, so I don't see why you feel the need to mention it. The problem here is that the majority of people who contributed to history are white, so the majority of history being taught is about white people. It's a function of their population there are way more of them, so obviously more of them will do things to contribute to history.

And I never said ALL political figures were white, I said most of them, which is true. As far as presidents, there are a few that had some non-white ancestry down the line, but they were all considered white. Ask a minority if they think any of the US presidents before Obama were one of them, I doubt any would say yes. I could make the argument we are ALL africans because of the OOA theory, but everyone knows that's not really true. Or else the whole issue of race wouldn't be an issue at all. Which is obvious by the idea of white privilege. I should just use that argument, there is no white privilege because there are no white people, we are all Africans evidently.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 03:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by acmpnsfal
[
It would not be falsely inflating anything, it would be giving credit where credit is due. I'm NOT saying include non-stories .
edit on 10-8-2012 by acmpnsfal because: (no reason given)


I agree, give credit where it's due. You can't give equal credit to minorities as whites when there are WAY more white people in the country, who have made more contributions.

Or do you believe that whites contributed to this country far less than their population percentage would indicate, and minorities far more?

Did white people only contribute 1/7th of the history of the USA? No? What percentage?



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Tiger5
reply to post by James1982
 


No You simply do not understand the idea of capitalism as an economic system. I am refering to capitalism as a comparatively modern economic and governing system. It is only 400 years old and was born on the back of slavery in the west.

You simply take one small sentence to rebut an entire argument? Wow!


WOW indeed! Just because you ignored my other responses doesn't mean I didn't respond do you does it? Look up... there are other posts of mine replying to you. Each one at least double the length of your reply here, BTW So how exactly did I single out that one sentence to rebut your whole argument? Because I put the reply to it in a different post and you ignored the previous ones I made? That's your fault not mine.

I understand capitalism very well, it seems you are the one that doesn't. Capitalism is not a form of government, it's an economic model. There is also STATE-Capitalism that involves government ownership of businesses, but you didn't say that, you said capitalism. That could mean almost anything.

At it's most basic level Capitalism is the trade of goods for profit. The DNA of Capitalism is nothing new and dates back before the western world as we know it today even existed.

If you are specifically talking about modern American capitalism you should have said that, but you didn't. Quite frankly I don't even understand the reason you would say capitalism was an invention of a white person. Does it matter? Is feudalism better? Which again existed far before the modern western world existed.



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 03:46 AM
link   
James1982, I quit, I quit, I quit, lol. From the posts you have responded to its clear that you are not really trying to understand the issue. You admitted earlier in the thread, when you started responding to my responses, that you really wanted to try to learn. You said:


I'll reply to your reply about my reply, I don't think you are wasting your time and honestly hope you don't feel you are either. I read and think about all your posts so you aren't wasting your time in my eyes. My replies might come a bit slow as my thoughts are more complex than the simple rebuttals I posted in my OP.


You have since backtracked from that though because apparently the "claims are simplistic" now. Lol. But you are still falling into the same traps of thinking that I called out on before. Firstly, this is not just a black and white issue, you and several other posters within this thread seemed determined to make it that though. Also, you are still being defensive without trying to learn. In several of the responses you just posted you keep insisting that white people can be discriminated against too. Nobody has tried to deny that fact, so why do you feel the need to keep restating it? Like, I actually gave you that in your example of working in a place that was mostly Mexican. I tried to see it from your perspective. This thread is about white privilege. Just because a white person has access to it does not mean they can't experience discrimination or that they will be automatically rich. You are a white male, living in one of the richest countries in the world, and you seem to think that since the system isnt working your way, white privilege doesnt exist. Boo-hoo. I'm done.
edit on 14-8-2012 by acmpnsfal because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 04:54 AM
link   
reply to post by acmpnsfal
 


Fair enough, like I said let's just agree to disagree.

I never said the system isn't working for me. I'm alive. I can eat, sleep comfortably, have fun, go out with friends. I'm happy. I'm not going to complain simply because I'm not a millionaire. No boo-hoos needed here. I ask for no sympathy so I don't understand why you continue to act as if I do. I share certain experiences for the sole reason for showing that what the article claims is not true, that's it.

You say I'm trying to make this into a black and white thing, I'm not at all, and don't know why you see me as doing that. I simply mentioned that blacks were overrepresented in media according to the statistics posted earlier. Whites are overrepresented according to the same stats. Other minorities are underrepresented. How is this making it a black and white thing? Not once have I thought of it this way.

You say that nobody claims whites are not discriminated against, and ask why I keep bringing it up. I bring it up because it's at the backbone of the idea of white privilege. The article that started this whole thread listed 50 ways in which minorities are discriminated against and whites are not, that's basically what it all boils down to. If you agree whites are also discriminated against then what's the argument?

I'm open to changing my mind and love to hear other people's views. I think you are just misunderstanding what I'm saying. You asked why my rebuttals to the article in question were simplistic, I replied it's because the claims in the article were simplistic. I then went on to say I'd be willing to delve deeper and explain my viewpoint on any of the 50 rebuttals upon request. Which I think I've done for several of the 50.

Perhaps I'm approaching this in the wrong way. What does the term white privilege mean to you, specifically? Does it apply to every single white person in America?

To me it means that every white person in America isn't responsible for their own successes. When I get a job, it's not because I have years of experience, interview well, and have skills the employer is looking for. It's because I'm white.

When I make friends, get along with coworkers, people do nice things for me, it's not because I'm fun to be around, put effort into being nice to others, it's because I'm white.

When I get a woman to date me, it's not because she finds me physically or emotionally attractive, and enjoyable to be around, it's because I'm white.

My effort, skills, actions, feelings, desires, everything and anything I do or have I don't deserve. It just got it handed to me because I'm white.

THAT'S what the idea of white privilege means to me. Do you understand how that is incredibly offensive? I'll try to see things from your perspective, can you see things from mine?

I have no idea what ethnicity you are, but how would you feel if I claimed that every single thing you have and are is not a result of your own doing, but simply your skin color? That's what the idea of white privilege means to me, what about you?



posted on Aug, 14 2012 @ 07:41 AM
link   
Here is my white privilege

While the black kids in my class were spending their time learning the latest dance steps, I was learning the skills I was gonna need to support myself.
While they were teaching each other how to do the smurf. We were helping each other do home work,
While they were outside playing basketball telling each other how THEY were the one going to the NBA, We were the ones telling each other what were taking in collage.

We all made choices in our lives that led us right to the exact moment we are at now, someone didn't make them for us..
Even if racism is alive and well as some say it is, that still does not justify lack of achievement. Such a statement would be extremely troubling to any person who has become successful in spike of any obstacle placed in their path. White people, Black people, Asians,,,,everybody. It isn't because someone is black that keeps them in the ghettos. It is because the choices they made keeps them there.
Own it, change it and move on

In all my years,, in all the places I have ever worked never one time did I have a conversation in a job interview that went anything like .....this
" Well you know Ron, we had this application from a black guy, boy had great grades, really well spoken. Seemed he was perfect for the job. But then we got your application and saw you were white and by golly that's
just the kinda man we were looking for, Welcome aboard son,"
Nothing like that has ever happened to me, No nod and a wink., No secret handshake only us white guys know. Just lets see if you can make parts as good as you say.






top topics



 
12
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join