Delusional Nostalgia Is Killing White Men

[H10]

White people need to suck it up, even if they're impoverished and uneducated they still have some nebulous white privilege.

yeah like trillions of dollars of government gifted land and handme downs and hand outs. No single group in society has been given more from the government than white males. Literally they were handed out free land or near free land from the government, and in addition to that they were given white only immigration, and white only special low interest loans so they could buy houses and build equity even when they couldn't afford the said house. The so called impoverished uneducated white people sit on hundreds of trillions of dollars of land, not that they paid for but that was given to them by the government, for no other reason than being white aka Homestead act. Boo hoo.

[H10]

It has nothing to do with equal rights. It is the absurd fiction that white men living today are should feel guilty for the errors of the past. It is a child support system design to screw over men and reward women in the name of 'best interests of the child'.

No. That is the fiction you want to spread. People are not puppets that simply do what they are told. Any resentment towards minorities comes from peoples experience in their daily lives and if these resentments exist it more likely comes from the endless stream of anti-male/anti-white propaganda that people like you spread.

It should not be hard to understand: if you tell a group of people that they are to blame for everything you should expect this group of people to react badly. If you really believe in equal rights then you should start by treating everyone as equals - not by dividing society between oppressors and victims and showering special privileges on the designated victims.

Don't worry white men will soon be official victims and thus entitled to all the victim goodies society has to offer like affirmatve action, racial profiling and police beatings.

[Bonam]

yeah like trillions of dollars of government gifted land and handme downs and hand outs. No single group in society has been given more from the government than white males. Literally they were handed out free land or near free land from the government, and in addition to that they were given white only immigration, and white only special low interest loans so they could buy houses and build equity even when they couldn't afford the said house. .

Except that people are individuals, not "groups". No one in my family ever got given any free land nor any special low interest rate loans. So when some idiot looks at me and thinks I am "privileged" because the ancestors of people who had similar skin tones got something, they can go screw themselves.

[Bonam]

That's not it, but thanks for playing. White privilege is, quite simply, that whiteness confers certain advantages on a day-to-day basis that other do not enjoy. That's all there is to it.

Take a hypothetical case:

Let's say every single person in society is treated equally, except one person who everyone treats like crap. Is it more accurate to describe the situation by saying that every single person except that one is "privileged", or that that one person is discriminated against?

Now what about if instead of everyone and 1 person, say group A is 99% of the population and is treated well, and group B is 1% of the population and is treated poorly. Are members of group A really privileged? Or is it just that group B is discriminated against?

Being treated the same way as the majority of the population is not a "privilege".

A privileged group would be an aristocracy, where they are a minority of the population that has additional rights or privileges that most of the population doesn't get.

[TimG]

That's not it, but thanks for playing. White privilege is, quite simply, that whiteness confers certain advantages on a day-to-day basis that other do not enjoy. That's all there is to it.

There is no material difference between what I said and you said. You are just trying to spin it as a benign fact of no consequence. The trouble is your spin makes no sense because if people who complain about such things really believed it was benign they would not be complaining about. Embedded in their complaints is the clear implication that whites would not have what they have without this alleged 'privilege'.

Of course, that presumes that one accepts the nonsensical notion that differences in statistical means affect every individual in the group. I don't which is why I say white privilege is a complete myth.

Edited December 3, 2015 by TimG

[Michael Hardner]

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/02/27/3338521/obama-black-men-charts/

TimG - just because it doesn't affect every individual in the group doesn't make it untrue, nor does it exonerate the system as being fair. This statement may be false ("anyone white could not have gotten where they have if it was not for the alleged advantage they have because of white skin") on the whole, or maybe unprovable but that's a discussion about aggregation of numbers and so on, not one about social factors in our midst.

[TimG]

TimG - just because it doesn't affect every individual in the group doesn't make it untrue, nor does it exonerate the system as being fair.

The statistics themselves do not establish the system as unfair. It is simply wrong to take such data and conclude that there is a causal link between outcomes and race when what we are likely seeing is a correlation between race and other underlying causal factors.

What sticks in my craw is the epithet 'check your privilege' which is used to negate the opinion of people simply because of their race. The premise behind this epithet is that every white individual is privileged which is simply wrong. People should be judged by their individual circumstances - not their race.

[Michael Hardner]

The statistics themselves do not establish the system as unfair.

That is also true. But you will not be able to isolate causal factors, and persistent gaps highlight some core reason, as you imply.

The premise behind this epithet is that every white individual is privileged which is simply wrong. People should be judged by their individual circumstances - not their race.

I think that is the point behind educating people behind racism. And the request is that you "check" not that you assume you have it.

[H10]

Except that people are individuals, not "groups". No one in my family ever got given any free land nor any special low interest rate loans. So when some idiot looks at me and thinks I am "privileged" because the ancestors of people who had similar skin tones got something, they can go screw themselves.

Only white people get the privilege in our society to be seen as an individual and not a group. a muslim in an airport, a chinese trying to rent, an african canadian walking by the cop doesn't get that advantage. You might not have gotten free land, but maybe your parents aren't telling you. I'd have to know your specific background to honestly answer the question. If your parents immigrated to canada last year, well dominion's land act was over so they probably didn't get free land, however they probably did get lower interest rates than if they were another race and more money to borrow.

If you care to share your family's history and immigration timeline so I can give a better response go ahead, and if not, that is fine too. It just makes it harder for me to explain it to you in your circumstance.

[H10]

The statistics themselves do not establish the system as unfair. It is simply wrong to take such data and conclude that there is a causal link between outcomes and race when what we are likely seeing is a correlation between race and other underlying causal factors.

What sticks in my craw is the epithet 'check your privilege' which is used to negate the opinion of people simply because of their race. The premise behind this epithet is that every white individual is privileged which is simply wrong. People should be judged by their individual circumstances - not their race.

Gaps alone do not establish unfairness, rather gaps with a certain history and ongoing practice of racial discrimination seem to. I do wonder what would be the underlying factor you think isn't racial?

[TimG]

Gaps alone do not establish unfairness, rather gaps with a certain history and ongoing practice of racial discrimination seem to. I do wonder what would be the underlying factor you think isn't racial?

I think it is well established that wealthy families provide an advantage to their children and grandchildren. The disparity is simply reflection of fact that blacks are catching up from discrimination in the past, however, discrimination the past is not evidence of discrimination today and children of rich black families like the Obama's are extremely privileged while children of poor whites face many of the same challenges that poor blacks face.

IOW - individual should be treated as individuals - not as some stereotype derived from aggregate statistics which do not apply to individuals.

Edited December 4, 2015 by TimG

[Black Dog]

There is no material difference between what I said and you said. You are just trying to spin it as a benign fact of no consequence. The trouble is your spin makes no sense because if people who complain about such things really believed it was benign they would not be complaining about. Embedded in their complaints is the clear implication that whites would not have what they have without this alleged 'privilege'.

Nope. That's your interpretation as an aggrieved white man. Obviously there are manifestations of white privilege that are relatively benign and others that are less so (I have gone my entire life without once being stopped by a cop without cause, a situation that would be highly unlikely if I were black). Would I be where I am today as a white guy if I were subject to the same treatment as a black male? It's difficult to say. But the reality is that difference in experiences exists.

This is reflected on a broad scale in crime and punishment, in education, in media representation etc. etc.

Of course, that presumes that one accepts the nonsensical notion that differences in statistical means affect every individual in the group. I don't which is why I say white privilege is a complete myth.

Imagine being a person of colour and claiming racism is a myth because you've never personally experienced it. That's exactly the same logic you're employing here.In short: it's garbage. You can always tease out individual experiences that differ from broader social trends, but that doe not invalidate or disprove those trends.

[H10]

I think it is well established that wealthy families provide an advantage to their children and grandchildren. The disparity is simply reflection of fact that blacks are catching up from discrimination in the past, however, discrimination the past is not evidence of discrimination today and children of rich black families like the Obama's are extremely privileged while children of poor whites face many of the same challenges that poor blacks face.

IOW - individual should be treated as individuals - not as some stereotype derived from aggregate statistics which do not apply to individuals.

It is true that discrimination of the past doesn't casually prove, discrimination today. I believe rather discrimination of today proves discrimination of this era proves discrimination in this era. There is more than enough discrimination in the last few decades against original people to not even have to invoke the past of hundreds of years ago.

The other issue is the past and present are inextricably linked as it regards to racism. people who are racist today aren't racist in a vat. Racist policies of today, were constructed in the past. The homestead act for instance gave hundreds of millions of acres and trillions of wealth to white homesteaders just for being white. Those white people still sit on that land today, worth trillions. You cannot de-link white wealth of today, with that racist policy of the past.

Wealthy families provide an advantage within their own race. The whole point of racism is to ensure that upwardly economic mobile blacks do not pass poor whites.

Strange how you have no issue calling Obama's children, knowing they and their father have been catching racist hell from millions of whites for almost the last 10 years, privilege but have an issue with the term white privilege. Obama's kids are privilege compared to poorer originals, but compared to whites, they will still be racially profiled, they will still face work place racism, they will still face racism in the classroom from bitter clingers, they will still have to pay more on all of their loans. Rich and upper class originals catch more white racism, not less.

Poor whites are not in the same boat as poor originals. Whites get white privilege, and no amount of money can get you that.

It is impossible to ignore group dynamics because the policies of the past made everything group based. We must first fix passed wrongs before we can move beyond group policies.

[TimG]

I believe rather discrimination of today proves discrimination of this era proves discrimination in this era.

Except where is the evidence that "discrimination" is the root cause of the gap today rather than a hang over from the wrongs of the past?

Those white people still sit on that land today, worth trillions. You cannot de-link white wealth of today, with that racist policy of the past.

A tiny percentage of the population today are affected by such past benefits because of immigration and the dilution of the wealth effect after 3 or 4 generations.

Wealthy families provide an advantage within their own race. The whole point of racism is to ensure that upwardly economic mobile blacks do not pass poor whites.

No - that is a fiction you invented to rationalize your views. Racism, where it exists, is simply a manifestation of human tribalism and fear of the "other". The way to combat racism is create an environment for people from different backgrounds view each other as being part of the same "tribe". Rants about white privilege and accusations that average white person is an inveterate bigot only serve to exacerbate those diversions.

Strange how you have no issue calling Obama's children, knowing they and their father have been catching racist hell from millions of whites for almost the last 10 years

hell which is not materially different from the abuse heaped on Bush, Clinton or Reagan. Political partisans on both sides vilify the leaders of their opponents and use all kind nasty rhetoric to attack them.

Poor whites are not in the same boat as poor originals. Whites get white privilege, and no amount of money can get you that.

Repeating a false assertion does not make it true. Look at the popular image of a 'white hilly billy/trailer park trash' - if these people were not white such stereotypes would be considered gross racism but I guess people assuming you are stupid and married to your sister is called "white privilege" in your race centered view of the world. Money matters. Poor people are not privileged no matter what their skin colour.

It is impossible to ignore group dynamics because the policies of the past made everything group based. We must first fix passed wrongs before we can move beyond group policies.

You can't fix the past. What is done is done. The only thing that can be done is acknowledge the wrongs of the past and establish a social framework to ensure they do not happen in the future. But the anti-white bigotry that in embedded in your arguments simply repeat the mistakes of the past.

[H10]

Except where is the evidence that "discrimination" is the root cause of the gap today rather than a hang over from the wrongs of the past?

A tiny percentage of the population today are affected by such past benefits because of immigration and the dilution of the wealth effect after 3 or 4 generations.

No - that is a fiction you invented to rationalize your views. Racism, where it exists, is simply a manifestation of human tribalism and fear of the "other". The way to combat racism is create an environment for people from different backgrounds view each other as being part of the same "tribe". Rants about white privilege and accusations that average white person is an inveterate bigot only serve to exacerbate those diversions.

hell which is not materially different from the abuse heaped on Bush, Clinton or Reagan. Political partisans on both sides vilify the leaders of their opponents and use all kind nasty rhetoric to attack them.

Repeating a false assertion does not make it true. Look at the popular image of a 'white hilly billy/trailer park trash' - if these people were not white such stereotypes would be considered gross racism but I guess people assuming you are stupid and married to your sister is called "white privilege" in your race centered view of the world. Money matters. Poor people are not privileged no matter what their skin colour.

You can't fix the past. What is done is done. The only thing that can be done is acknowledge the wrongs of the past and establish a social framework to ensure they do not happen in the future. But the anti-white bigotry that in embedded in your arguments simply repeat the mistakes of the past.

Some of this seems like you are just disagreeing for being disagreeable, even where I agree with you!

Except where is the evidence that "discrimination" is the root cause of the gap today rather than a hang over from the wrongs of the past?

Use google. Look up all the lenders who have plead guilty to discriminating against african americans, it shouldn't be hard to find discrimination they face today. If you can truly find nothing, let me know.

A tiny percentage of the population today are affected by such past benefits because of immigration and the dilution of the wealth effect after 3 or 4 generations.

This is not the case at all. Even white immigrants got to homestead in canada and the usa. Go outside the cities, you'll find millions of whites living on multi-generational land from homestead days. This isn't just something 10 million people have. They may well dilute the wealth through having too many kids, however it doesn't change the fact, trillions of dollars of homestead land given out by the government.

"93,000,000: Estimated number of homesteader descendants alive today."

http://www.nps.gov/home/learn/historyculture/bynumbers.htm

197 million non-hispanic whites in the usa. This is almost 50% of the white non-hispanic american population. In Canada, you'd have an even larger percentage, because you have more whites occupying a larger area of land. Throw on the VA bill, fha, welfare, min wage, white race preference for admissions of university and jobs, which all started out as white only or heavily restricted to whites in the 1950s and continued into the modern era, and it simply proves the point. they still find a white sounding name gets 15-50% more calls back with the same qualifications than a african american or chinese one.

No - that is a fiction you invented to rationalize your views. Racism, where it exists, is simply a manifestation of human tribalism and fear of the "other". The way to combat racism is create an environment for people from different backgrounds view each other as being part of the same "tribe". Rants about white privilege and accusations that average white person is an inveterate bigot only serve to exacerbate those diversions.

Provide evidence that this is true. Show me that racism is fiction. Show me evidence rich originals do not face race based discrimination. Because denial of home buying, loans, business loans, these aren't poor originals being denied, it is rich and upper middle class ones.

hell which is not materially different from the abuse heaped on Bush, Clinton or Reagan. Political partisans on both sides vilify the leaders of their opponents and use all kind nasty rhetoric to attack them.

Repeating a false assertion does not make it true. Look at the popular image of a 'white hilly billy/trailer park trash' - if these people were not white such stereotypes would be considered gross racism but I guess people assuming you are stupid and married to your sister is called "white privilege" in your race centered view of the world. Money matters. Poor people are not privileged no matter what their skin colour.

Not at all similar, they have never faced the type of raced based vitriol and hatred where there mere election caused people to hate them and protest. bush, Clinton and Reagan were attacked on their policies, not their race, religion, or nationality.

White privilege doesn't skip over the head of poor whites, interesting how the so called poor white hillbillies sit on hundreds of acres of land per person in Appalachia.

money can't buy you out of racism in north america.

You can't fix the past. What is done is done. The only thing that can be done is acknowledge the wrongs of the past and establish a social framework to ensure they do not happen in the future. But the anti-white bigotry that in embedded in your arguments simply repeat the mistakes of the past.

We can't change the past, we can correct past injustices.

[Rue]

We can't change people with bigoted thought processes.

[eyeball]

we can correct past injustices.

So when were you thinking of starting and how?

[Bob Macadoo]

We can't change people with bigoted thought processes.

How very true but I think your grasp of grammar meant to imply a different meaning.

[H10]

So when were you thinking of starting and how?

It certainly can be done, there are different ways of achieving justice and I'd be open to more than just one way.

[Rue]

I think Bob Macadoo you need to explain what your "grasp of grammar" is before you project it as being mine, let alone then try sggest a "grasp of grammar " can imply any meaning let alone my meaning.

Finish what you started. You want to come here and take a snide pot shot, finish it.

You even have a clue of what you said? It made zero sense.

Here let me spell it out so you can grasp it if you must engage in such "erotic" references.

I contend this thread is based on a racist and bigoted pemises and I believe Hernandy engages in racist stereotypes against whites in this thread and so any comments he makes about bigotry are absurd since he engages in the very thing he criticizes these supposed "whites" for.

Racists complaining about racism are absurd.

Mr. Macadoo, its probably no a good idea you try grasp anything of mine. Clearly you can't handle it.

Edited December 6, 2015 by Rue

[Rue]

I wish to clarify that when anyone not just Hernanday, engage in a premises that one's skin colour is justification to then make subjective stereotypes about characteristics, motives, attributes, beliefs, claiming they flow from that skin colour, in my opinion such opiniins are racist and I know most posters would agree with that and it has nothing to do with being left or right.

In this thread my comments are directed at Hernanday because he initiated the thread as he has others using the racist term white. Its not personal. I would say the exact same thing to anyone who has those beliefs. Its the contents of their words I am questioning.

I believe this thread if it singled out brown, black, yellow skin, Muslims, would have been more quickly criticized as racist, but because the word "whites" is being used, it escapes the same criticism and it should not.

It is absolutely pathetic in this day and age, any of us still have to label people by their skin colour for any reason and if Mr. Macadoo or Hernanday or anyone else does not understand this point, it goes to my point that when people engage in certain opinions, they long ago stopped looking at people for who they are and can only see their own projections as to what they think these people are.

[Bob Macadoo]

I wish to clarify.....

Thank-you for the clarification......I was confused by your commentary in Middle East topics......but now it's clear.

[Rue]

Your welcome Mr. M. if you were being sincere.

I am not trying to be a know it all on this one Mr. M. I just find singling out people based on subjective biases about their skin colour or religion or ethnicity ridiculous.

If someone talked this way about your ethnicity or religion or skin colour, I will be the first to defend you.

If that makes me delusional, great. My skin colour has nothing to do with it.

Edited December 8, 2015 by Rue

[Moonlight Graham]

Except where is the evidence that "discrimination" is the root cause of the gap today rather than a hang over from the wrongs of the past?

...

Racism, where it exists, is simply a manifestation of human tribalism and fear of the "other". The way to combat racism is create an environment for people from different backgrounds view each other as being part of the same "tribe". Rants about white privilege and accusations that average white person is an inveterate bigot only serve to exacerbate those diversions.

I agree with the 2nd part. However, let every MLW member ask themselves: if they owned a business and they had 2 hiring candidates with equal qualifications, where one candidate was from their own ethnic group and the other was an immigrant with an accent from another ethnic group, which would would you hire? Same question, but say you had to do home renovations and one contractor was from your own ethnic group and the other was an immigrant with an accent from another ethnic group (say an Arab or a Nigerian), which would would you hire?

I'm very confident I know how the large majority of Canadians would answer this question, even if they'd never admit it, and even if it would be almost impossible to get accurate stats on it. Since whites are the majority group in Canada, and hold most of the economic/political/social power, this presents a systemic problem for many visible minorities in Canada. I think it's human nature to have a "fear of the other", and we all need to fight this within ourselves.

[Michael Hardner]

MG - the truth is not so easy. First of all an accent is a potential reason to discount a candidate. It's a hard truth, but if you had two identical candidates and one with an accent then that differentiates them for better or for worse.

But, assuming that that was the case, any reasonable businessman would want to hire the one with the accent. Why ? My experience says that accents bring down somebody's market value to a significant degree.

It's a terrible thing to be bought and sold in the marketplace, and we all are on both ends of those equations every day.