Wisconsin's "White Privilege" Wristbands

[Michael Hardner]

It sounds a lot like projection. It's also an ad hominem argument.

Not at all - if people feel bad or resentful it has nothing to do with me, and I will only offer help if people can explain to me why I should care. Or perhaps, when we're supposed to care about social problems and when we're not.

In other words, if you don't think African Americans have any problems, but you're whinging about reverse racism or some fantasy, then explain to me why I should care about one kind of racism (the immeasurable pedantic kind) and not another.

If you're offended then it's your problem unless you can explain why it's mine.

[scribblet]

It really makes no difference what you think of it. The issue in this op is a campaign by people who DO believe that there is a causal relationship between being black and being disadvantaged (i.e. if the campaigners really cared about the disadvantage they would have left 'white' out of their campaign). I get the impression that you are trying to avoid this detail because you realize that it completely undermines your arguments.

The whole argument is outdated and just divides people by race A non white person with successful parents, a good education and skill set will likely do a lot better than a white under privileged person in a low income trailer park. (okay bit of a stereotype). I agree there is still a disparity in N.A. (more in the U.S. than in Canada) but IMO for the most part race is not the issue

Does this discussion or argument mean that minorities will always need special favours to do better and that affirmative action hasn't helped minorities? Is 'white privilege' any different than getting where you because of affirmative action. Isn't affirmative action a form of unearned

privilege ?

[TimG]

I think it's a distraction to looking at the result - as I said we don't have to know why, we just have no know the obvious - which is that this group that started out at a place of subjugation and has not yet achieved parity.

Except by pointing that out you are implicitly claiming that there is a relationship between the prior status of US blacks and their current status today. IOW - you are claiming that being black is the CAUSE of the difference in aggregate statistics. If that is not what you intended to imply you would have never made the statement so you cannot credibly claim you did not intend to imply that. Edited March 24, 2013 by TimG

[Michael Hardner]

Wow, that's not what I'm getting from it at all. I'm all for discussion issues. What I'm against is symbolism over substance. SOME African Americans face disadvantages. To think that it's all, in my opinion, is inherently racist on it's own.

Nobody thinks that every single person faces the same disadvantages - there is variance in all things in life.

So the need for so-called awarness is absurd.

"Everybody" may not apply to students who are learning about history, the world and so on. They teach things like history, sociology and so on.

This type of PC crap needs to stop.

PC as in controlling what people talk about ? The pot is calling the kettle... er... uh....

They will be reaching this stuff in school, obviously. If you feel that they shouldn't go ahead with your campaign, as fringe as it may appear to others.

[scribblet]

Your words:

"don't remember much else but all it did was foster resentment. In fact, none us had thought much about race and inequality as jobs and promotions were based on skill sets, interviews and merit. However, after these seminars, the requirement to keep race stats (% of asians, e. asian, black native, disabled etc.) and the awarding of additional points for just being a minority, it did change perceptions on who was actually being discriminated against."

Clearly, the "us" in this is you - so were you resentful or not ?

I resented being taken away from my busy schedule for unnecessary seminars. Apart from that, the discussion is not about me, I just used some 90s information in order to relate what was happening.

[Michael Hardner]

Except my pointing that out you are implicitly claiming that there is a relationship between the prior status of US blacks and their current status today. IOW - you are claiming that being black is the CAUSE of the difference in aggregate statistics. If that is not what you intended to imply you would have never made the statement.

.

"Cause" is your word - I'm not agree with it or disagreeing. There is a relationship between all groups over time, so your statement is again nonsensical.

It's very difficult to follow the line of logic between anti-racist-racism as a problem meaning that racism itself isn't a problem.

[Michael Hardner]

I resented being taken away from my busy schedule for unnecessary seminars. Apart from that, the discussion is not about me, I just used some 90s information in order to relate what was happening.

Ok, so you did feel bad about it. I guess that's what this is about - we should care about your employer forcing you to take part in sensitivity training, or whatever they were trying to correct in your behavior. In any case, society moves ahead in discussing its collective problems.

Needless to say, you complaining about your time wasted in this regard is not likely to register on society's top 5 list of problems.

[Michael Hardner]

I agree there is still a disparity in N.A. (more in the U.S. than in Canada)

Thank you.

Now I will leave B_C to take you to task for talking about US problems on a Canadian forum, or what have you.

[Shady]

Nobody thinks that every single person faces the same disadvantages - there is variance in all things in life."Everybody" may not apply to students who are learning about history, the world and so on. They teach things like history, sociology and so on.PC as in controlling what people talk about ? The pot is calling the kettle... er... uh....They will be reaching this stuff in school, obviously. If you feel that they shouldn't go ahead with your campaign, as fringe as it may appear to others.

The only thing fringe is this whole wristband exercise. I'm sure as parents start to find out about it, you'll see just how fringe it and you are. This isn't 1950 anymore.

[Michael Hardner]

The only thing fringe is this whole wristband exercise. I'm sure as parents start to find out about it, you'll see just how fringe it and you are. This isn't 1950 anymore.

In the over-reactosphere, perhaps the inclusion of a page that suggests wearing a wrist band warrants widespread panic.

But in the real world ... in Wisconsin ... Maybe parents and students who don't agree with this will simply not do it.

[scribblet]

Ok, so you did feel bad about it. I guess that's what this is about - we should care about your employer forcing you to take part in sensitivity training, or whatever they were trying to correct in your behavior. In any case, society moves ahead in discussing its collective problems.

Needless to say, you complaining about your time wasted in this regard is not likely to register on society's top 5 list of problems.

Too bad so sad, this is an open discussion and you don't have to care, it was a comment. Neither where they trying to correct 'my behaviour' the whole organization of around 1700 people had to take part in various mandated seminars, IMO it was relative to the discussion All part of the 90s employment equity and quota initiatives implemented to attempt to redress 'white privilege'.

[Shady]

In the over-reactosphere, perhaps the inclusion of a page that suggests wearing a wrist band warrants widespread panic.

But in the real world ... in Wisconsin ... Maybe parents and students who don't agree with this will simply not do it.

No panic is necessary. Just disagreement. Stop presenting false choices and ad hominem argument. You're being far from a so-called forum facilitator.

[Michael Hardner]

Too bad so sad, this is an open discussion and you don't have to care, it was a comment. Neither where they trying to correct 'my behaviour' the whole organization of around 1700 people had to take part in various mandated seminars, IMO it was relative to the discussion All part of the 90s employment equity and quota initiatives implemented to attempt to redress 'white privilege'.

Too bad, so sad. I like that phrase.

[Michael Hardner]

No panic is necessary. Just disagreement. Stop presenting false choices and ad hominem argument. You're being far from a so-called forum facilitator.

I'm engaging in discussion, and there's nothing ad hominem about my viewpoint. More to the point, people complaining about discussion of race because they're sensitive or offended is antithetical to discussion isn't it ?

Let's talk about it, I say.

[Canuckistani]

Ok - you don't think white people do better than other races ? Or you think that they do better, but for some specific reason ?

Many brown (or is it yellow?) people do better than the whites. Excel in school, come here with nothing and quickly acheive wealth. What color wrist band do they have to wear? Same with Jews - do very well as a people, the askenazim anyway. I guess yellow bands for them, huh?

No no, I know. White people do well because of white privilege. Non-white people do well despite white privilege. Whites are so useless, just succeed because of privilege. And all whites are the same of course. I sure hope they make non-whites who can pass wear those things too, since they are also beneficiaries of the privilege. At one time being black but being able to pass was a great privielege (ie advantage) indeed, as long as nobody found out. The wristband would help with that.

Edited March 24, 2013 by Canuckistani

[bush_cheney2004]

Thank you.

Now I will leave B_C to take you to task for talking about US problems on a Canadian forum, or what have you.

Do I need your permission to do that ?

[Canuckistani]

We know how easy it is to breed dogs for certain characteristics. Works just as well for humans. So here's an idea - slaves brought to America were selected for their physical strenght. This was further tested during the horrendous conditions of the trip to America - many did not make it. Intelligence, on the other hand would not have been selected for, inffact selected against. See where I'm going with this? Is that the white privilege, now that physical abilities aren't very helpful in attaining success unless you excel in sport or dancing? Yeehaw, this racist stuff is fun. As much truth to this as to white privilege. Never mind the white wrist band, just give the me the whole sheet to wear.

[Michael Hardner]

Do I need your permission to do that ?

No more than Johnny Carson needed Ed McMahon's permission.

[Canuckistani]

No more than Johnny Carson needed Ed McMahon's permission.

HIyo.

[Moonlight Graham]

I disagree with that assertion. It is not reality. It is a myth being propagated by people that wish to deny that success in life is a function culture rather than race. Culture is what matters. Cultures that put a high value on learning and hard work will succeed. Cultures that put a value on a family with a father and mother present will move forward. Those that do not will fall behind.

The effect is most obvious when you compare the cultures of poor whites vs. rich whites. Poor whites share many of the same cultural traits with poor blacks and see similar outcomes. The same divide exists between rich blacks and poor blacks.

Trying to claim that people who succeed are only succeeding because of 'privilege due to their skin color' is insulting.

I think you make some good points but this is an overly-simplistic analysis. I agree in your comparison of rich whites vs poor whites or poor blacks/rich blacks. The personal family culture, community culture etc. can differ greatly even within races, and I know lazy yahoo white-trash idiots who live on my street along with really hard-working, smart, responsible families who have more economic success.

However, if you take two groups of people with a similar culture of work ethic, one black and white white, there's no denying that whites will have an advantage based on systemic hierarchal structures and attitudes, including the "ol' white men's club" or whatnot, similar to how women can face a glass-ceiling while trying to rise in the ranks within ie: a corporation or political party. Many employers will still hire a white person or a Muslim person who has an Arabic accent even if their resumes are equal, this is undeniable, I personally know white employers who have admitted this to me.

I think both culture AND race or some of factors that go into economic success. Whites do have undeniable systemic privileges, but also think making kids wear wristband is a bit ridiculous. Discussing it in the classroom, among other things, is fine IMO.

[TimG]

Many employers will still hire a white person or a Muslim person who has an Arabic accent even if their resumes are equal, this is undeniable, I personally know white employers who have admitted this to me.

Someone who does not speak perfect English is not equal to a candidate that does. You may wish to argue that the difference should not matter but it is still a tangible in difference in skill set which invalidates your example.

Also, the ability to fit in matters. If I interviewed for a small company of hip 20 somethings I would not be surprised to get passed over in favour of a younger person with less experience because I would stick out like a sore thumb in such an environment. I don't see anything wrong with this.

Racism only enters into the picture if there are two candidates with the same resume, the same English ability, the same age and the same level of assimilation. I have never seen that.

[Canuckistani]

Racism only enters into the picture if there are two candidates with the same resume, the same English ability, the same age and the same level of assimilation. I have never seen that.

We could have the white Slovenian fresh off the plane vs the 2nd Gen Indo-Canadian. You really think Mr Sambunjak will experience white privilege over Mr Gill? But Michael's point seems to be about the effect of slavery on Afro-Americans. Seems to me that often the Afro-American candidate will be chosen, assuming they are qualified, because the company wants to meet a racial quota. A black one-legged lesbian would hit the jackpot. Edited March 25, 2013 by Canuckistani

[TimG]

We could have the white Slovenian fresh off the plane vs the 2nd Gen Indo-Canadian. You really think Mr Sambunjak will experience white privilege over Mr Gill?

Actually I would expect the reverse - Mr. Gill as a 2nd generation Canadian speaking perfect English with Canadian mannerisms would have the advantage in the Canadian labour market.

But Michael's point seems to be about the effect of slavery on Afro-Americans. Seems to me that often the Afro-American candidate will be chosen, assuming they are qualified, because the company wants to meet a racial quota.

A practice which undermines respect for those blacks that earned the job based entirely on their own merits.

[Canuckistani]

Actually I would expect the reverse - Mr. Gill as a 2nd generation Canadian speaking perfect English with Canadian mannerisms would have the advantage in the Canadian labour market

Me too, that was my point.

Affirmative action, with two equal candidates, one black, one white, I have no problem with at all. This could be a very sound business decision. Preferring the black candidate with inferior credentials just because of color, that is not right.

Edited March 25, 2013 by Canuckistani

[betsy]

You really need to think about posts like this. For example - can you think of other situations where disadvantaged people were forced to identify themselves to the majority, in fairly recent history ?

Think about it.

Jews in Hitler's era covered both - depending on which perspective you're looking from. They had to wear the star of David on their sleeves!