White Pride

[Michael Hardner]

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/insights/052416/top-10-wealthiest-families-world.asp

"Family" net worth isn't as relevant as individual net worth.  There aren't as many Waltons, for example.

[WIP]

21 hours ago, taxme said:

I heard that the Rothchild family is worth over 500 trillion. Of course when you create a nations currency you can print just about as much money as you wish too and put that created out of thin air money right into your bank account. Some people get all the breaks and the money too. Where the hell did I go wrong?  

We're all getting robbed by the bankers whose overall strategy is to take real, tangible assets and wealth in exchange for virtual or imaginary money!  As long as we believe our money has the value it claims, we think all is well, but the major banks of the world are the main benefactors of the complex, convoluted system of transnational banking and investment. 

So, I'm not sure if the Rothschild Family descendants still own or control most of the banks with their name on them, or have 500 trillion...the way big money moves around the world and is invested today, it's hard to say! I've heard similar stories about these filthy rich Saudi princes and allied Gulf emirs that have their wealth stashed in foreign tax shelters. All we know is that based on their profligate spending alone their wealth is in the billions.

[Argus]

On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 7:29 AM, Michael Hardner said:

1) There is, though.  The statistics show that white people do better..

Correlation is not causation. Asian people do better than White people. Why doesn't white privilege harm them?

On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 7:29 AM, Michael Hardner said:

2) Why do they do that ?

Why do they do it so much more than they did in the 1940s and 1950s? Why do they do it so much in Jamaica?  The culture of Carribean and North American Blacks (as opposed to AFrican Blacks) does not put a lot of emphasis on education either.  Asians have out of wedlock kids less than anyone. That's not a coincidence. They don't have babies out of wedlock nearly as much, and the two parents really put a lot of emphasis on the kids educations.

On ‎5‎/‎22‎/‎2018 at 7:29 AM, Michael Hardner said:

3) Aren't you acknowledging an advantage for whites here ?

Not unless you can explain why Asians are advantaged by white privilege.

[Michael Hardner]

11 minutes ago, Argus said:

1) Correlation is not causation. Asian people do better than White people. Why doesn't white privilege harm them?

2) The culture of Carribean and North American Blacks (as opposed to AFrican Blacks) does not put a lot of emphasis on education either.  A 

3) Not unless you can explain why Asians are advantaged by white privilege.

1) Why do you think it doesn't ?

2) What is the causation behind Black culture then ?

3) I don't think so.

[Argus]

19 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) Why do you think it doesn't ?

Because White privilege is a myth. Asians have fewer kids out of wedlock and they make sure those kids go to college. Jews do the same. Both groups perform much better economically as a result.

Do you know that to get into major colleges in the US you get a 230 point bonus on the SATs if you put Black as your race, but are docked 50 points if you put Asian?  Why do you think that is?

19 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

2) What is the causation behind Black culture then ?

Right now it seems to be largely inspired by celebrities, mostly rappers who wallow in gangsta culture. I suspect you want to trace it all back to slavery, but to do that you'll have to explain why the Black community's single motherhood and crime rates skyrocketed after the sixties.

 

 

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

Because White privilege is a myth. Asians have fewer kids out of wedlock and they make sure those kids go to college. Jews do the same. Both groups perform much better economically as a result.

 

Circular explanation.  You say white privilege is disproven by success of Asians in N. America.  I ask you why you don't think Asians are negatively impacted by racism, and you say "it's a myth" then quote some other stats.

Your usual schtick is to call out salient group characteristics and use it to rationalize some opinion, but your approach is inconsistent depending on the group.

[Argus]

19 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Circular explanation.  You say white privilege is disproven by success of Asians in N. America.  I ask you why you don't think Asians are negatively impacted by racism, and you say "it's a myth" then quote some other stats.

Your usual schtick is to call out salient group characteristics and use it to rationalize some opinion, but your approach is inconsistent depending on the group.

The sole reason given to 'prove' white privilege is the economic failure of the Black community compared to the White community. Pointing out that that the reason given for that failure does not appear to factor into the success of the Asian community is elementary logic. Either you need to discount white privilege as an excuse for Black economic failure or you need to explain why it doesn't affect Asians.  Thus far you have made no effort to deal with this.

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, Argus said:

1) The sole reason given to 'prove' white privilege is the economic failure of the Black community compared to the White community.

2) Pointing out that that the reason given for that failure does not appear to factor into the success of the Asian community is elementary logic.

3) Either you need to discount white privilege as an excuse for Black economic failure or you need to explain why it doesn't affect Asians.   

1) You love to frame the discussion around your own terms.  I don't agree that that is the sole reason to discuss white privilege.

2) I disagree.  You want to frame everything as financial success and therefore prove racism doesn't exist... or something.  No idea but I don't buy it.

3) Economically doesn't affect them in the way you think, you mean.

I'm actually just tired of having to think like you, even having to do it to just understand your posts.  It may be awhile before I get back to this...

[Argus]

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) You love to frame the discussion around your own terms.  I don't agree that that is the sole reason to discuss white privilege.

And you love to critique the imagined reasons for why I frame a discussion or point,  take the attitude that your view, whatever that might be, is superior, and then never bother to enlighten us on what that view might be. I present information and logic and often evidence that supports my view. You critique it while never offering up your own.

3 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

2) I disagree.  You want to frame everything as financial success and therefore prove racism doesn't exist... or something.  No idea but I don't buy it.

I get to frame things in these discussion because you never do, except for inserting smarmy strawmen like 'you think racism doesn't exist', which no one has even suggested. Therefore, if I don't make my position based on my beliefs there is no discussion. You prefer to sit back like some elitist professor grading papers. It's an obnoxious habit of yours.

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, Argus said:

I get to frame things in these discussion because you never do, except for inserting smarmy strawmen like 'you think racism doesn't exist', which no one has even suggested.  

You saying white privilege isn't a thing because Asians make money is pretty basic and enough of a strawman on its own.

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

You saying white privilege isn't a thing because Asians make money is pretty basic and enough of a strawman on its own.

No it's not. If someone can illustrate some evidence of white privilege which is NOT based on the actual behaviour of the racial groups in question I'd listen, but so far the only evidence of white privilege I have seen is Black economic failure, and issues which derive from that, including a much higher Black crime rate, and the way that affects people's view of them. Black economic failures as far as I'm aware is the heart of the argument for the existence of white privilege. You insist it is not but give nothing else.

[Michael Hardner]

13 minutes ago, Argus said:

Black economic failures as far as I'm aware is the heart of the argument for the existence of white privilege. You insist it is not but give nothing else.

If racism exists, how can privilege not exist ?

[Bonam]

8 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

If racism exists, how can privilege not exist ?

Because they're different things?

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, Bonam said:

Because they're different things?

But they are linked.  If one group experiences racism from a group that generally has more influence, it seems pretty basic to me that it's a thing.

[Bonam]

17 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

But they are linked.  If one group experiences racism from a group that generally has more influence, it seems pretty basic to me that it's a thing.

A privilege is a special advantage that a specific person or group enjoy. When the group in question forms a large majority of the population, it's not really a privilege to be a member of that group, it's just the norm. Imagine the extreme case, lets say everyone is treated equally, except 1 guy that everyone hates. It's doesn't make sense to describe the status of not being that one hated person a "privilege", but that one person clearly still experiences discrimination. The same is true if instead of 1 guy you have 2 people that everyone discriminates against, or even a few % of the population. A "privilege" is something that can be correctly used to describe the advantages one might get from being a member of a hereditary aristocracy, like a medieval noble, or someone born into riches, but not just for having the same rights and treatment as the vast majority of the population, even if there is some minority that faces worse treatment under certain circumstances. 

The very use of the word "privilege" is intended to try to guilt people into thinking they are beneficiaries of some undeserved advantage. But that is clearly not the case. White people in America have precisely the rights and responsibilities that all Americans are supposed to have as defined by the constitution and state and federal law (although, in some cases, those rights are infringed upon by various government agencies). If some groups are treated worse, which arguably they are in certain cases, then that is certainly a problem that should be rectified, but it has nothing to do with privilege. 

Edited May 29, 2018 by Bonam

[Michael Hardner]

I don't agree with your definition of privilege.  What you describe is, to me, privilege of the people not in that group.

And you are assigning motives as though someone designed the term to cause guilt, which isn't verifiable and likely isn't true.

Anyway, it seems that we agree on the situation just not the word being used.  Suggest an alternative if you like, I'm all about reasonable accommodation.

[GostHacked]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Circular explanation.  You say white privilege is disproven by success of Asians in N. America.  I ask you why you don't think Asians are negatively impacted by racism, and you say "it's a myth" then quote some other stats.

Your usual schtick is to call out salient group characteristics and use it to rationalize some opinion, but your approach is inconsistent depending on the group.

Head out to Vancouver and see how your white privilege helps you. I wonder how my white privilege would work in China... or would it?

[GostHacked]

But we can also talk about privilege among all groups.  We have no idea what kind of privilege people have in many nations. Some there are none at all, for anyone.

[Michael Hardner]

3 hours ago, GostHacked said:

Head out to Vancouver and see how your white privilege helps you. I wonder how my white privilege would work in China... or would it?

I have said this before and I shall say it again: what.

[GostHacked]

9 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

I have said this before and I shall say it again: what.

Vancouver has a very high Asian population. I am wondering how your white privilege would help you there.

[Michael Hardner]

16 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Vancouver has a very high Asian population. I am wondering how your white privilege would help you there.

Why are you wondering that ?  If a Chinese guy takes my parking space because I am white is White Privilege hence disproven ?  Bonam seems to have got further in getting me to step back on what WP really is, but based on etymology.  Still, I truly believe that shared language is a bridge to shared understanding.

We still have two words for the tar sands/oil sands for Hoover sakes....

[SRV]

When looking at issues like racism, and privilege, and white pride, I am not surprised that those who identify as white feel that there is less tolerance for white pride. I think that this may be explained in part by the things that many of the “proud” whites take pride in. And is perhaps better attributed to culture and politics than it is to colour or race. What i call the dominant culture –the culture that considers itself to be on the top rung of some imagined Darwinian chain of social evolution. It even claims a moral duty to reshape every other “backward, primitive, underdeveloped “ country and culture on the planet in its own image, for their own good and progress mind you. This dominant culture is basically setting the rules in the global marketplace, and has pretty much comodified the resources of every country and defines the terms of trade, and value of goods or services. For the most part its members don't attribute their privilege and power to skin colour or genetics, but rather their own ingenuity, hard work, and technical know-how. They are self-made men, living in self-made countries, and willing to share and impose their superior economic development model on all and sundry. Historical reasons for their privileged positions are ignored: Colonialism, empire, slavery, genocide,cultural genocide, and the like. In the era of colonialism this was often justified on religious grounds: The Doctrine of Discovery, Manifest Destiny, saving the souls of the pagans, etc. It continues today. Neo-colonialism, or corporate colonialism is justified because it brings investment and development to the underdeveloped. Governments do more to protect and promote corporate access to corporations than they do to protect the sovereignty of their own citizens over the resources under their own feet. Those who resist are considered to be obstructing progress. Even their own progress. Those who lose their cultural identity when they lose their land-base are accused of failing to adapt. The resulting loss of culture and cultural values –alternative answers to the question of what it means to be human and integrated to life on this planet-- are not considered to be the victims of cultural damage. The loss of cultural is merely collateral damage of progress.

 

I could go on. But much of the intolerance to white pride is best attributed to white arrogance. The assumption that everyone wants to play football, and that everyone has equal opportunity according to the rules of the game. They cannot opt out. they cannot suggest a different game. Its the only game on the planet. The end of history. A game that, as is becoming increasing clear, poses a lethal threat to pretty much every life-form on the planet.

(I have written on this elsewhere. I will put in a link. The Question and Answer part in the middle may be of particular interest .)

The Dominant Culture as an Invasive Species: The end of History?

 

 

[taxme]

On 5/29/2018 at 1:22 PM, Michael Hardner said:

1) You love to frame the discussion around your own terms.  I don't agree that that is the sole reason to discuss white privilege.

2) I disagree.  You want to frame everything as financial success and therefore prove racism doesn't exist... or something.  No idea but I don't buy it.

3) Economically doesn't affect them in the way you think, you mean.

I'm actually just tired of having to think like you, even having to do it to just understand your posts.  It may be awhile before I get back to this...

Racism has been around since time began and will always be around. Get over it. The liberals/democrats constantly whine about how racism is so rampant in America all the time. Well it is not at all. It is those two mentioned above that keep wanting to promote racism for political reasons only and nothing more. They just hope that they can convince enough blacks that racism is alive and well and vote for us and we will help fight it is a favorite ploy those liberals and democrats like to push and play. Just show you give a dam about racism and hope you get their votes. Get over it. Why do you appear to keep having a problem with this so called racist bogeyman all the time that does not really exist except in your mind? Get over it will you. 

[taxme]

6 hours ago, SRV said:

When looking at issues like racism, and privilege, and white pride, I am not surprised that those who identify as white feel that there is less tolerance for white pride. I think that this may be explained in part by the things that many of the “proud” whites take pride in. And is perhaps better attributed to culture and politics than it is to colour or race. What i call the dominant culture –the culture that considers itself to be on the top rung of some imagined Darwinian chain of social evolution. It even claims a moral duty to reshape every other “backward, primitive, underdeveloped “ country and culture on the planet in its own image, for their own good and progress mind you. This dominant culture is basically setting the rules in the global marketplace, and has pretty much comodified the resources of every country and defines the terms of trade, and value of goods or services. For the most part its members don't attribute their privilege and power to skin colour or genetics, but rather their own ingenuity, hard work, and technical know-how. They are self-made men, living in self-made countries, and willing to share and impose their superior economic development model on all and sundry. Historical reasons for their privileged positions are ignored: Colonialism, empire, slavery, genocide,cultural genocide, and the like. In the era of colonialism this was often justified on religious grounds: The Doctrine of Discovery, Manifest Destiny, saving the souls of the pagans, etc. It continues today. Neo-colonialism, or corporate colonialism is justified because it brings investment and development to the underdeveloped. Governments do more to protect and promote corporate access to corporations than they do to protect the sovereignty of their own citizens over the resources under their own feet. Those who resist are considered to be obstructing progress. Even their own progress. Those who lose their cultural identity when they lose their land-base are accused of failing to adapt. The resulting loss of culture and cultural values –alternative answers to the question of what it means to be human and integrated to life on this planet-- are not considered to be the victims of cultural damage. The loss of cultural is merely collateral damage of progress.

 

I could go on. But much of the intolerance to white pride is best attributed to white arrogance. The assumption that everyone wants to play football, and that everyone has equal opportunity according to the rules of the game. They cannot opt out. they cannot suggest a different game. Its the only game on the planet. The end of history. A game that, as is becoming increasing clear, poses a lethal threat to pretty much every life-form on the planet.

(I have written on this elsewhere. I will put in a link. The Question and Answer part in the middle may be of particular interest .)

The Dominant Culture as an Invasive Species: The end of History?

 

 

You must be referring to those globalist Zionist banksters that have been trying for centuries now to try and make the world in their own image. A problem that white people get blamed for all the time and have to listen to all the time. The white people have done way more for humanity than those hucksters mentioned above ever have. They work to exploit we the people rather than work with them. There is nothing wrong with white people showing their pride for and about themselves. It is okay to be white.  Works for me. 

[Argus]

7 hours ago, SRV said:

When looking at issues like racism, and privilege, and white pride, I am not surprised that those who identify as white feel that there is less tolerance for white pride.

There is NO tolerance for white pride.  Yet blacks are encouraged to take pride in being Black. So are numerous other groups.

7 hours ago, SRV said:

 think that this may be explained in part by the things that many of the “proud” whites take pride in. And is perhaps better attributed to culture and politics than it is to colour or race. What i call the dominant culture –the culture that considers itself to be on the top rung of some imagined Darwinian chain of social evolution. It even claims a moral duty to reshape every other “backward, primitive, underdeveloped “ country and culture on the planet in its own image, for their own good and progress mind you.

And yet, it's not doing so. Why do you suppose that is?

7 hours ago, SRV said:

This dominant culture is basically setting the rules in the global marketplace, and has pretty much comodified the resources of every country and defines the terms of trade, and value of goods or services. For the most part its members don't attribute their privilege and power to skin colour or genetics, but rather their own ingenuity, hard work, and technical know-how

What do YOU attribute it to?

7 hours ago, SRV said:

They are self-made men, living in self-made countries, and willing to share and impose their superior economic development model on all and sundry. Historical reasons for their privileged positions are ignored: Colonialism, empire, slavery, genocide,cultural genocide, and the like. In the era of colonialism this was often justified on religious grounds: The Doctrine of Discovery, Manifest Destiny, saving the souls of the

This is just sniveling about what white countries did once they become undisputedly  richer and more powerful than everyone else. It fails to explain how they became indisputably more advanced in technology, industry, science, culture and military ability. 

After all, every nation on earth expanded to the best of its ability, conquering and slaughtering all who opposed them from other tribes and nations until they were stopped.