White Pride

[Argus]

On ‎5‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 7:06 PM, Michael Hardner said:

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

And once again you are disagreeing with someone's definition of privilege while refusing to illustrate your own. You're not a professor guiding class discussion, you know.

[Argus]

On ‎5‎/‎29‎/‎2018 at 4:50 PM, Michael Hardner said:

If racism exists, how can privilege not exist ?

Racism exists on the part of all peoples of all colours and religions.

Albeit there is much less of it in white countries.

Edited May 30, 2018 by Argus

[GostHacked]

The one group that oppresses white people the most are ..  whites.

[Bonam]

On 5/29/2018 at 4:06 PM, Michael Hardner said:

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.

I think it's enough to discuss "racism" as it applies to certain minority groups. The idea that members of any particular group that doesn't face racism in the same way  have "privilege" is not a useful idea to me. It adds nothing productive to the discussion and only breeds resentment, defensiveness, and division. What end is served by discussing "white privilege" that is not better served by understanding the impacts of racism on minority groups and trying to rectify those situations? 

One of the most common uses of the idea of privilege is to tell someone to "check your privilege". Have you heard that expression? It's literally a method to try to shame someone, based on their race or gender, into shutting up, trying to tell them that their opinion is not worthwhile to contribute. I.e. when a white male states an opinion about racism or sexism that is not in accord with the prevailing social justice ideological viewpoint, he will be told to "check your privilege" as a means of shutting him up and dismissing his opinion. 

[Michael Hardner]

14 hours ago, Argus said:

And once again you are disagreeing with someone's definition of privilege while refusing to illustrate your own. You're not a professor guiding class discussion, you know.

Fair enough.  I see 'privilege' meaning pretty much the same as 'advantage', whether it is asked for or explicitly granted.... or not.

[Michael Hardner]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

Fair enough.  I see 'privilege' meaning pretty much the same as 'advantage', whether it is asked for or explicitly granted.... or not.

Actually - it's even referred to in the definition I got from Google:

 

noun

 

1. 1.

   a special right, advantage, or immunity granted or available only to a particular person or group of people.

https://www.google.ca/search?q=privilege&rlz=1C5CHFA_enCA785CA786&oq=privilege&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.1191j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Edited May 31, 2018 by Michael Hardner

[Michael Hardner]

14 hours ago, Argus said:

Racism exists on the part of all peoples of all colours and religions.

Albeit there is much less of it in white countries.

I generally agree, however we have a reason to solve problems in our own country, and exactly as people prioritize things.  The west has a strong history of striving for a culture of objectivity, and equality IMO.  This is why we struggle even with group generalizations, as they are fraught with bias.  I can say Canadian African immigrants have biases against other African immigrants but how much of a problem/priority is that ?

And I will give you this as well: none of this is rational.  We are humans, not robots.  We strive for rationality but we can never achieve it.

[Michael Hardner]

13 hours ago, Bonam said:

1) I think it's enough to discuss "racism" as it applies to certain minority groups. The idea that members of any particular group that doesn't face racism in the same way  have "privilege" is not a useful idea to me. It adds nothing productive to the discussion and only breeds resentment, defensiveness, and division. What end is served by discussing "white privilege" that is not better served by understanding the impacts of racism on minority groups and trying to rectify those situations? 

2) One of the most common uses of the idea of privilege is to tell someone to "check your privilege". Have you heard that expression? It's literally a method to try to shame someone, based on their race or gender, into shutting up, trying to tell them that their opinion is not worthwhile to contribute. I.e. when a white male states an opinion about racism or sexism that is not in accord with the prevailing social justice ideological viewpoint, he will be told to "check your privilege" as a means of shutting him up and dismissing his opinion. 

1) If you want to talk about racism instead, then we are really just arguing about syntax.  I am fine with proceeding and agreeing to ignore certain words, or to declare certain words not universally accepted.  Personally, I feel we waste too much time on such arguments anyway because they are easier.

2) I don't think it's an attempt to invoke guilt... at all.  It's trying to get people to empathize how the world is different for others.  

[Bonam]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) If you want to talk about racism instead, then we are really just arguing about syntax.  I am fine with proceeding and agreeing to ignore certain words, or to declare certain words not universally accepted.  Personally, I feel we waste too much time on such arguments anyway because they are easier.

No, it's really not just a matter of syntax. Tell some laid off coal miner in America's rustbelt that he has "white privilege" and see how far you get trying to convince him about your point of view. This is why liberals in America are still puzzled over the 2016 election, they just don't get that throwing around words like "white privilege" instantly repels about half the population. 

Quote

2) I don't think it's an attempt to invoke guilt... at all.  It's trying to get people to empathize how the world is different for others.  

On that we disagree. The term is a blatant attempt to invoke guilt and shame, it is its only real purpose, and the people who use it thrive on divisive identity politics and racial tension. Anyone who isn't already 100% brainwashed into social justice ideology will be instantly repelled by being told they have "white privilege" rather than empathizing. If there's someone out there who is genuinely trying to get someone to "empathize" with the difficulties minorities sometimes face by yelling at white people that they have "white privilege", they must be really puzzled by their lack of success in convincing anyone. 

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, Bonam said:

1) Tell some laid off coal miner in America's rustbelt that he has "white privilege" and see how far you get trying to convince him about your point of view. This is why liberals in America are still puzzled over the 2016 election, they just don't get that throwing around words like "white privilege" instantly repels about half the population. 

2) On that we disagree. The term is a blatant attempt to invoke guilt and shame, it is its only real purpose, and the people who use it thrive on divisive identity politics and racial tension. Anyone who isn't already 100% brainwashed into social justice ideology will be instantly repelled by being told they have "white privilege" rather than empathizing. If there's someone out there who is genuinely trying to get someone to "empathize" with the difficulties minorities sometimes face by yelling at white people that they have "white privilege", they must be really puzzled by their lack of success in convincing anyone. 

1) Agree to disagree then.  I am not going to say "White Privilege" doesn't exist to make him happy any more than he will say it does to make me happy.  It's a matter of syntax in terms of agreeing to priorities and responses.

2) Don't impugn motives.  Otherwise, I could say that you are intentionally trying to dehumanize me and invalidate my opinion by calling me 'brainwashed'.  Again, agree to disagree and move on.  You won't convince me that I am brainwashed, and I don't expect you to accept 'white privilege' after our discussion here.  But don't tell me why I use the term: I know why.

[Argus]

2 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Fair enough.  I see 'privilege' meaning pretty much the same as 'advantage', whether it is asked for or explicitly granted.... or not.

That's nice but you haven't explained what the advantage is. What is my advantage as a white person benefiting from racism?

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, Argus said:

That's nice but you haven't explained what the advantage is. What is my advantage as a white person benefiting from racism?

There is an aggregate economic advantage, that's enough for me.

[Argus]

10 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

There is an aggregate economic advantage, that's enough for me.

You're presuming the economic advantage is to due my white skin and not to the actions and behaviour of the black population. If my advantage is merely that my parents were married and I completed school and got a job why do you feel justified in penalizing me because my economic success was greater than members of a community which did not do these things?

Edited May 31, 2018 by Argus

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

1) You're presuming the economic advantage is to due my white skin and not to the actions and behaviour of the black population.

2) why do you feel justified in penalizing me ...

1) We have simply said that racism exists and being white has an economic advantage.  I will not argue individual cases as it's nonsense to do so.  

2) I haven't penalized you in any way.

[Argus]

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) We have simply said that racism exists and being white has an economic advantage.  I will not argue individual cases as it's nonsense to do so.  

Racism exists. But having white skin does not have an economic advantage. Finishing school, getting good marks, and not having children while you're an unwed teen have economic advantages. That one community do these things more than other communities is not a reason to punish them and reward the community which does not do these things.

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

2) I haven't penalized you in any way.

The white community is penalized for having more economic success than the Black community (as is the Asian community). Its members have to have higher SAT scores to get into university courses. Its members will be actively and legally discriminated against by governmental institutions in hiring and promotion in favour of members of the Black community.

[Michael Hardner]

10 minutes ago, Argus said:

1) But having white skin does not have an economic advantage.   

2) ....not a reason to punish them and reward the community which does not do these things.

3)   Its members have to have higher SAT scores to get into university courses. Its members will be actively and legally discriminated against by governmental institutions in hiring and promotion in favour of members of the Black community.

1)   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

2)  Punish ?  By using a the term 'white privilege' ?  Does the idea of punishment work without impugning motives I wonder ?

3)  I guess I would have to see cites on these individual cases to comment, but these things existed before 'white privilege' as a term became an issue.  This is an example of the language being irrelevant and even a distraction.

[GostHacked]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

There is an aggregate economic advantage, that's enough for me.

Maybe that is more of where you were born and grew up more than anything about the colour of your skin.

[Michael Hardner]

9 minutes ago, GostHacked said:

Maybe that is more of where you were born and grew up more than anything about the colour of your skin.

Who knows.  It's an effect, overall, that is for sure.  Does it help every individual ?  I don't think it does.  

[Argus]

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1)   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income

Thanks for demonstrating Asian privilege. Or did you have some other intent there?

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

2)  Punish ?  By using a the term 'white privilege' ?

This is not about simply using the term, but the concepts behind and the policies designed to counter it.

4 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

3)  I guess I would have to see cites on these individual cases to comment, but these things existed before 'white privilege' as a term became an issue.  This is an example of the language being irrelevant and even a distraction.

It's all part of the concept that because incomes are low among Blacks it must be due to racism and therefore government has to take action to help them out. But there's no actual evidence racism is at fault. Asians make up 5% of the population but active discrimination against them by colleges is needed to keep their numbers down around 15-18%. They sure must have a lot of privilege!

http://jadeluckclub.com/1623-average-sat-score-of-asian-american-but-still-not-good-enough-for-ivy-league/

As for Black privilege:

Asians Penalized 50 Points On SAT – Black Students Given 230 Bonus Points…  Don’t let your jaw drop too far, this fundamental change is not just happening in college application processes.  This exact same methodology is also being applied to Credit Scores for home mortgages and car loans.

https://theconservativetreehouse.com/2015/02/28/asians-penalized-50-points-on-sat-black-students-given-230-bonus-points/

 

[Michael Hardner]

2 minutes ago, Argus said:

1) Thanks for demonstrating Asian privilege. Or did you have some other intent there?

2) This is not about simply using the term, but the concepts behind and the policies designed to counter it.

3) It's all part of the concept that because incomes are low among Blacks it must be due to racism and therefore government has to take action to help them out. But there's no actual evidence racism is at fault.  

1) Yes, to show that there's an advantage over many other groups.

2) That's a separate issue.  If we didn't use that term there would still be programs.

3) Ok - I will look at your link but it's for another thread.

 

[Argus]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

1) Yes, to show that there's an advantage over many other groups.

For Asians? 

 

[Michael Hardner]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

For Asians? 

 

No, they are discriminated against in other ways.  Am I really teaching you all about the world for the first time ?

[Bonam]

1 hour ago, Argus said:

For Asians? 

Social justice ideologues hate to discuss Asians because they don't neatly fit the narrative of the evil white man keeping everyone else down. 

1 minute ago, Michael Hardner said:

No, they are discriminated against in other ways.  Am I really teaching you all about the world for the first time ?

Except that in the case of Asians it results in higher educational and economic performance? Whereas in the case of blacks it results in lower? Talk about an unfalsifiable theory. 

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, Bonam said:

1) Social justice ideologues hate to discuss Asians because they don't neatly fit the narrative of the evil white man keeping everyone else down. 

2) Except that in the case of Asians it results in higher educational and economic performance? Whereas in the case of blacks it results in lower? Talk about an unfalsifiable theory. 

1) I get to ignore this drive-by because you are demonizing people.

2) Once again: Asian people making more money does not mean racism is fake.

[Argus]

16 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

No, they are discriminated against in other ways.  Am I really teaching you all about the world for the first time ?

You were the one who posted household income disparity as an example of white privilege. Pointing out that Asians earn more than whites is entirely logical. And your response now seems to be that household income is not really an indication of white privilege after all?