Racism and privilege

[One Brow]

You seem to think you know my wishes...

Only to the degree that your words reveal them. However, I will try to be careful in separating intent from effect.

If you are white you are and if you are not white you are not. Simple.

If you are white, you benefit from racist privilege, if you are not, you don't. It is that simple.

Accusations of racism are a favorite tactic of the left anytime they do not get their way or blanket agreement of their way. They have this notion that any disapproval or anything short of total support is racism. This line of thinking is disgusting.

Racism is not used to justify the Affordable Care Act, food stamps, nor any other program not directly connected to race. They are justified by need, fairness, and dignity. However, racism is sometimes noted as factor in the responses of various opponents, in particular where such responses include the well-known racist dog-whistles. If you can't make a cogent argument against a "leftist" point of view without using racist dog-whistles, is that really a problem for the "left" (not that I think we have a major political party on the left in this country anyhow).

 

[Gameface]

If you are white, you benefit from racist privilege, if you are not, you don't. It is that simple.

Does benefitting from racial privilege make one a racist?

Why do you come at this like you do? You start out by calling us all racists and then tell us how ignorant we are. Why not explain what racial privilege is and how it manifests itself on our society? You don't need to point fingers at individuals like Stoked and myself. We're not your enemies. We don't "want" racial privilege to continue because it benefits us. Just because casual and unfounded accusations of racism are distasteful to us that doesn't mean we support racism or want the current power dynamic to continue unchallenged.

You can't start a constructive dialogue by drawing a line in the sand and saying all of you on that side are evil horrible people, let me tell you why. It just doesn't work like that.

 

[One Brow]

Is it racist of me to assert, in no uncertain terms, that One Brow is the trolliest troll currently trolling the board?

I think it's inaccurate. Generally, the label of troll is not applied to someone who refuses to divert a thread, and instead creates a different topic. Generally, the label of troll is not applied to someone with a particular ax to grind, as long as they don't use that ax everywhere. So, your choice of that label is curious. I'm too close to the situation to say it's racist, though, since it's about me.

I'd like to believe that his motives stem from a desire to see equality, but I do not believe this at all. Not one little tiny bit.

If he were to, just once, try to steer the conversation toward a solution to a problem, rather than just point fingers at everyone (else), I could then find reason to accept that his intentions are good.

The solution is get people to recognize and change their behavior. Studies show that people who deny they are biased behave with more bias.

That is all I am going to say, and I am not going to visit this thread again. I am uninterested in One Brow's flurry of bull**** and straw man chicanery.

I understand if you wouldn't want you to put yourself out and become part of the solution.

I'm looking forward to seeing Sirkicky bring the hammer down on Stoked for multiple unconsolidated posts.
(#8, #9, #10.)

The only poster who I recall ever had that applied, was a poster who would respond to the exact same post with 3 or 4 consecutive posts, as opposed to consolidating the response to one post within one post, and did this over and over and over and over again. It was a form of spamming.

Sometimes they deserved to be punched. Why is it very becoming though?

Reminds me of catzies. I miss having her around.

 

[Dr. Jones]

I'm looking forward to seeing Sirkicky bring the hammer down on Stoked for multiple unconsolidated posts.
(#8, #9, #10.)

I thought you were self-banned?

 

[One Brow]

Don't hang yourself with this line of thinking.

Privilege undoubtedly exists, but I think it's a mistake to do anything more than acknowledging it in a general sense and tackling the issue in a personal sense. The privilege argument is a sloppy one that basically demonizes all white people in a way that is as false as the blanket racism applied by white people against everyone else for hundreds of years in this country.

The argument of white privilege doesn't demonize white people any more than the argument of male privilege demonizes men. It's denial of the privilege that results in demonization. Recognition of you you benefit from the privilege, and grant it, is the first step to removing it.

 

[One Brow]

I agree with both Numb and One here.
I don't think One is demonizing all white people , he's just saying that racism is a real disadvantage for most black people in many life situations. Those are 2 different things.
An NPR story this week said that Doctors give different (arguably better) treatment to white patients, even if the Doctor is not white.
Go figure.

One person's story on job searching.

 

[moevillini]

Reminds me of catzies. I miss having her around.

hey, Stoked is doing his best - show him some gratitude


HELLO KITTY EMBRACES DIVERSITY...

 

[One Brow]

I'm not sure that things are really getting better for the majority of "black" Americans, even though there certainly are opportunities for some.

Better than the 1950s, yes. Better than the 1990s, questionable.

 

[moevillini]

hey, Stoked is doing his best - show him some gratitude


HELLO KITTY EMBRACES DIVERSITY...

OOOOOPS!!!!!

I didn't even notice the white was an angel kitty and the black was a devil kitty. Sorry.

It didn't really show up in the smaller icon size of the image I originally saw. It was an honest mistake, honest.

 

[One Brow]

No never mind. Just a little feud between me and kick.

Why would you bother?

 

[Stoked]

hey, Stoked is doing his best - show him some gratitude


HELLO KITTY EMBRACES DIVERSITY...

I just finished "Diversity and Inclusion" training about 30 minutes ago. True story.

 

[Stoked]

Why would you bother?

Delusions of grandeur. Morefeasts goes on and on about this fued with Kicky and Kicky doesn't even know who this poster is.

 

[moevillini]

You can't make people change if they don't want to. If there are ten gazillion bad examples you treat it the same way people talk about eating an elephant. It sounds like a lot to eat, but you do it one bite at a time. You set a good example and influence one person at a time....

You're right that you can't automatically force a person to change their opinion, but you can force them to change their behavior. Laws do that all the time.

And over time, as the behavior changes, we can hope that the opinions will also change.

 

[One Brow]

Entitlement and accountability are more of an issue, which include every race.

Thinking something is owed to you because of "blablabla" and always having someone or something to blame because something did not go your way and you didn't get what you want.

This would be an example of "racist dog-whistles". The notion that blacks feel entitled, are not accountable, feel that they are owed something, and are looking for something to blame.

The surest way to fix problems is to not dwell on the problem, and not to tell other people how to act... but to show other people how to act and to promote the solution every day in who you are.

Regardless of how you act, people will still treat you differently. Telling people to shut up and accept racism is not an acceptable answer, because unlike Stockton/Ainge, the calls don't go the other way.

 

[moevillini]

One Brow, what solutions would you suggest?

 

[One Brow]

I absolutely disagree. focusing on race is the problem. only when it is truly irrelevant will it no longer be a problem.

Racism, today, doesn't usually occur when people focus on race, it usually occurs when people don't focus on race, but allow their rapid judgments to stand. When people focus on race, and in particular on how another persons race might be influencing their opinion, they exhibit less racism.

 

[sirkickyass]

The only poster who I recall ever had that applied, was a poster who would respond to the exact same post with 3 or 4 consecutive posts, as opposed to consolidating the response to one post within one post, and did this over and over and over and over again. It was a form of spamming.

The specific instance that led to an infraction involved a thread string where he had something like 16 of the last 20 posts, all by him.

The worst anyone else has gotten is a PM or post asking them to please remember that multi-quote and/or the edit feature exists. Sometimes we just merge multiple posts together (a process that is much easier than it was 3-4 years ago as a result of board upgrades).

That said, I take it as a given that some percentage of users just chafe at the concept of moderation and take all of it to be an assault on personal dignity.

 

[One Brow]

This argument has merit as a fanatical counterweight to right wing fanaticism, IMO. Counterweight arguments are counterproductive, as Gameface's insulted response to your accusation proves.

You say that like hurting some feelings is a bad thing. I've been reading a lot of white people that say they didn't really understand how awful their position was until they were confronted directly with anger and hurt. it's far too easy to cocoon yourself in an opinion.

Point scored, but this doesn't have any bearing on the discussion.

Perhaps not the discussion you'd like to have.

Do you have anything to show that this is a significant issue today? I'm not saying it's not, but in our corporatized world it's harmful for institutions to discriminate for any reason.

Only if the majority of institutions do not discriminate. Since the vast majority do discriminate (I mean in the sense of the actions of individuals, and not as corporate policy), and those that do not often get treated as second-class by the vast majority, the repercussions are minimal.

As for studies, I've linked a few in JazzFanz before, and there are many, many more out there. If you don't know, you haven't looked.

Did Ghandi make people do things his way.

Yes. The whole point was to expose the underlying violence, force people to confront themselves, and thereby be forced to change.

Did Mother Theresa force people think she was great and follow the way she lives? Did Christ force people to follow him?

Both were highly outspoken advocates for their positions, and not shy about hurting people's feelings when needed.

Making a law, or attempting to force people to act a certain way will not solve the problem.

Often, it can be a step on the way to solving a problem. In particular, getting people to acknowledge their bias can lead to them acting with less bias.

Most or all people take longer to change a given action when that action is criticized. If that person is shown a better way, and encouraged, positive change seems to happen faster and in a more complete manner.

I agree, both negative and positive reinforcement are useful. Neither of those involves keeping quiet.

All I can say is thank the dear Lord I don't view the world the way you do.

As a white man, you'll never need to.

Is there anything I can say to defend myself and my own virtues when someone is intent on discrediting me for having white privilege (even though/especially because racial or gender privilege is real)?

It's sloppy, and I generally don't find it productive.

You don't need to defend yourself, because it's a statement of objective truth, not moral imperfection. All you are being asked to do is recognize, accept it, and in the future, keep it in mind when you interact with others.

Ahh white liberal guilt...it's like a little taste of growing up back in the Bay Area.

Because white people couldn't possibly genuinely believe any of this, there just being emotionally manipulated? Dog-whistle.

 

[One Brow]

Such as unemployment among blacks. It's probably got worse since the late 90s, but that's probably more due to a weakened economy and outsourcing and manufacturing jobs being lost in this country and a host of other things than some hidden racism in society, though the racism part could have something to do with it too (maybe in this case that if there are fewer jobs out there in the job pool that lower educated workers get screwed more and that institutional racism, and again other factors, have made education poorer in predominantly black communities).

Studies have been done on hiring practices, and hiring shows racist patterns. A while ago I linked to a study in which white convicts got job offers at better rates than blacks who had no criminal record, and whites with no criminal record as highly significant higher rates.

 

[Stoked]

You say that like hurting some feelings is a bad thing. I've been reading a lot of white people that say they didn't really understand how awful their position was until they were confronted directly with anger and hurt. it's far too easy to cocoon yourself in an opinion.



Perhaps not the discussion you'd like to have.



Only if the majority of institutions do not discriminate. Since the vast majority do discriminate (I mean in the sense of the actions of individuals, and not as corporate policy), and those that do not often get treated as second-class by the vast majority, the repercussions are minimal.

As for studies, I've linked a few in JazzFanz before, and there are many, many more out there. If you don't know, you haven't looked.



Yes. The whole point was to expose the underlying violence, force people to confront themselves, and thereby be forced to change.



Both were highly outspoken advocates for their positions, and not shy about hurting people's feelings when needed.



Often, it can be a step on the way to solving a problem. In particular, getting people to acknowledge their bias can lead to them acting with less bias.



I agree, both negative and positive reinforcement are useful. Neither of those involves keeping quiet.



As a person, you'll never need to.



You don't need to defend yourself, because it's a statement of objective truth, not moral imperfection. All you are being asked to do is recognize, accept it, and in the future, keep it in mind when you interact with others.



Because people don't have to believe any of this.

Fixed for you.