Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

White Privilege, does it exist in the USA? The answer may not surprise you......

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    Originally posted by Jutland View Post

    So no refute to my point then.


    Not sure what your "point" was, other than to imply that "white privilege" was just a USA thing, in which case I may shown otherwise.

    Racial/ethnic "privilege" tends to be something basic to human nature and pops out in nearly all cultures/countries.

    Hop over to Japan and not be "Japanese" and experience "Japanese Privilege".

    Go to India and experience "Indian Privilege" ...
    ... or go to China and experience "Chinese Privilege" ...

    Come to think of it, based on my experiences, both India and China have so many ethnics and cultural/language/cuisine/etc. differences that each 'Nation' has it's own multiple variations on regional/ethnic "privilege" = local bias factors.

    Sort of like what a Connecticut (White)Yankee might experience when going to a Southern Alabama town where everyone(White) there has connections going back generations, but "the Yankee" might as well have purple skin and green hair when it comes to "acceptance" by the locals.

    Which is what is really in consideration here. Hence my example of the "Scottish* Privilege" factor (* 'Home of the Vikings ).

    Years ago I worked with a large group of co-workers from SE Asia. My fellow "white privilege", Liberal co-workers referred to them all as "rice eaters". Myself, having a bit of background with their region, knew they were more varied than that. While they would work side-by-side on the production floor, come break and lunch time they separated into local groups. Laotian at one table, Cambodian at another, Viets, at their own varied ones. I got to know them and discussed their regional/cultural backgrounds to point of being accepted in their company, such as a rare invite to join in celebrating the Asian New Year with them.
    TANSTAAFL = There Ain't No Such Thing As A Free Lunch
    “War is merely the continuation of politics by other means” - von Clausewitz

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by Skoblin View Post
      Was there White privilege in the 1930s when the housing program was brought in - no doubt there was. And there was White privilege straight into the 1960s, differing in degree from one part of the country to the next, of course. Since the Civil Rights Act and associated legislation, however, it has been on the decline. An argument can also be made that there has been "fossilized" privilege in the form of inherited wealth, with Whites generally inheriting greater wealth than Black Americans. But I think it can be generally asserted that this has also declined over time, thanks in part to the fact that real estate values have not held constant in various parts of the country and have even declined precipitously in some places when compared against the average. The overall historical trend is toward equalisation - for negative reasons in the former industrial states, as numerous black and white workers have both lost almost everything thanks in a large degree to trade policies, and for positive reasons in other parts of the country as a result of equal opportunity legislation, education grants, and other affirmative action policies. So, if there is White privilege today it is something that is in pronounced decline, and for many White Americans, does not exist at all.
      Given that America has such low levels of social mobility is it not true to say that the fossilized privilege you talk about is still casting a long shadow on the present and more proactive government policy is required to remediate that historical legacy. Justice delayed is justice denied.
      "The thing about quotes on the internet is that you cannot confirm their
      validity." - Abraham Lincoln.
      "Nothing's going to change while one side it lying about the cause and the other is lying about the solution" - Me

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Jutland View Post

        But materially they are WAY more likely to be better off.
        Maybe, maybe not. If they burn their support systems -- families, friends -- then they're just as down and out as a black guy in similar straits. The only obvious advantage that the Caucasian loser enjoys is that he usually has to actually do something in order to get on law enforcement's radar. The black guy, on the other hand, is always on their radar, 'cause he's a black guy.
        I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

          Maybe, maybe not. If they burn their support systems -- families, friends -- then they're just as down and out as a black guy in similar straits. The only obvious advantage that the Caucasian loser enjoys is that he usually has to actually do something in order to get on law enforcement's radar. The black guy, on the other hand, is always on their radar, 'cause he's a black guy.
          Nothing you say is untrue but that doesn't matter to my point, if they have to go through the extra steps of f%%%%g up to get to the same place as somebody who was born screwed..............that is a privilege (and advantageous position).

          And my housing example is a nigh on indisputable indication of how it happens and what the result is.

          That is why none of the usual suspects have tackled it head on, instead they have mentioned my nationality, party politics, the tiny unrepresentative minority of black success stories in the US, other countries, putting words in my mouth etc etc etc.......

          But not the action or the outcome of the action.

          Victory lap imminent

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Jutland View Post
            Nothing you say is untrue but that doesn't matter to my point, if they have to go through the extra steps of f%%%%g up to get to the same place as somebody who was born screwed..............that is a privilege (and advantageous position).

            And my housing example is a nigh on indisputable indication of how it happens and what the result is.
            In order to qualify for an FHA or HOLC mortgage, in any era, one has/had to show a reliable source of income -- regardless of race or nationality. There's no extra step in that.

            Check out Ric Burns' New York: a Documentary Film. Later in the series, covering the era of The Great Depression, they cover the establishment of the Federal Home Owners Loan Corporation. In the text of the enabling act were provisions that authorized local lenders and insurers to draw up maps that essentially rated neighborhoods be relative value and desirability. An African-American academic, whose name eludes me currently, explained the program in great detail, and its subsequent side effects. Long story short, after the end of WW2 the US experienced a boom in residential construction, and the HOLC maps were used to "red-line" various ares as undesirable, due to excessive African-American populations. Thus, my hometown of Brooklyn NY went from being the most integrated county (Kings Co) in the US prior to WW2, to being the most segregated by the close of the 1970s. Similar patterns of development afflicted countless US cities, and the fallout is with us to this day.

            Add to the the impact of the post-WW2 Interstate Highway Act, and it was then possible to cut-off and isolate "colored" neighborhoods from the rest of their cities, and whole areas could be essentially designated slums and left to rot. Then there was "slum clearance" and Title I public housing: more destructive programs might be hard to find. None of these programs were, in my opinion, formulated with racism in mind, but since their implementation was left to local officials, they were free to draw the maps any way they pleased. For your edification, I heartily recommend Robert A Caro's The Power-Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York. In my view it should be required reading in every civics class from coast-to-coast, and it would certainly go a long way towards explaining the kinds of public policies that were instrumental in establishing post-war "minority" slums.

            Originally posted by Jutland View Post
            That is why none of the usual suspects have tackled it head on, instead they have mentioned my nationality, party politics, the tiny unrepresentative minority of black success stories in the US, other countries, putting words in my mouth etc etc etc.......

            But not the action or the outcome of the action.

            Victory lap imminent
            You're not trying to put me in the position where I have to explain the actions of others, are you? Besides, I haven't the slightest clue of your nationality.

            By the way, what is your nationality?
            I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by slick_miester View Post

              In order to qualify for an FHA or HOLC mortgage, in any era, one has/had to show a reliable source of income -- regardless of race or nationality. There's no extra step in that.

              Check out Ric Burns' New York: a Documentary Film. Later in the series, covering the era of The Great Depression, they cover the establishment of the Federal Home Owners Loan Corporation. In the text of the enabling act were provisions that authorized local lenders and insurers to draw up maps that essentially rated neighborhoods be relative value and desirability. An African-American academic, whose name eludes me currently, explained the program in great detail, and its subsequent side effects. Long story short, after the end of WW2 the US experienced a boom in residential construction, and the HOLC maps were used to "red-line" various ares as undesirable, due to excessive African-American populations. Thus, my hometown of Brooklyn NY went from being the most integrated county (Kings Co) in the US prior to WW2, to being the most segregated by the close of the 1970s. Similar patterns of development afflicted countless US cities, and the fallout is with us to this day.

              Add to the the impact of the post-WW2 Interstate Highway Act, and it was then possible to cut-off and isolate "colored" neighborhoods from the rest of their cities, and whole areas could be essentially designated slums and left to rot. Then there was "slum clearance" and Title I public housing: more destructive programs might be hard to find. None of these programs were, in my opinion, formulated with racism in mind, but since their implementation was left to local officials, they were free to draw the maps any way they pleased. For your edification, I heartily recommend Robert A Caro's The Power-Broker: Robert Moses and the Fall of New York. In my view it should be required reading in every civics class from coast-to-coast, and it would certainly go a long way towards explaining the kinds of public policies that were instrumental in establishing post-war "minority" slums.



              You're not trying to put me in the position where I have to explain the actions of others, are you? Besides, I haven't the slightest clue of your nationality.

              By the way, what is your nationality?
              That was then, and this is now, and there have always been the privileged, the powerful and the corrupt among us. We could talk about Maxine Waters, if you like. Or Colin Powell. Or Barack Obama. Or the Southern black plantation/slave owners. Yes, there were some.

              But for most white Americans, there is no privilege and never has been. Meanwhile, how should a white low income person feel about a "privileged" black athlete making millions per game who is so poorly educated that he can hardly speak intelligent English, and whose only skill is to play a kids game,and who demands a "black anthem" and disrespects the anthem and flag of America? Now THAT is "privilege".
              Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                That was then, and this is now, and there have always been the privileged, the powerful and the corrupt among us. We could talk about Maxine Waters, if you like. Or Colin Powell. Or Barack Obama. Or the Southern black plantation/slave owners. Yes, there were some.

                But for most white Americans, there is no privilege and never has been. Meanwhile, how should a white low income person feel about a "privileged" black athlete making millions per game who is so poorly educated that he can hardly speak intelligent English, and whose only skill is to play a kids game,and who demands a "black anthem" and disrespects the anthem and flag of America? Now THAT is "privilege".
                Those examples are a fractiion of a percentile, they aren't representative.

                'Never has been'?!?; My example showed that there was.... millions of whites getting subsidised, segregated housing that would only appreciate in value, a whole new property class.

                And there are plenty of white athletes who get paid astronomical salaries but somehow you never mention them........


                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post

                  That was then, and this is now, and there have always been the privileged, the powerful and the corrupt among us. We could talk about Maxine Waters, if you like. Or Colin Powell. Or Barack Obama. Or the Southern black plantation/slave owners. Yes, there were some.

                  But for most white Americans, there is no privilege and never has been. Meanwhile, how should a white low income person feel about a "privileged" black athlete making millions per game who is so poorly educated that he can hardly speak intelligent English, and whose only skill is to play a kids game,and who demands a "black anthem" and disrespects the anthem and flag of America? Now THAT is "privilege".
                  I'm going to have to disagree. For example, in "closed-shop" states like New York, to this day an African-American licensed plumber, electrician, or pipe-fitter is still a pretty rare sight: some of those skilled trades unions (as opposed to public sector or low-skilled unions) have a long history of keeping blacks out of their unions, and out of their trades.

                  To some degree, union discrimination simply reflects the racial and religious prejudices among union members—prejudices that many unionists share with other prejudiced persons. Thus recently in the North, groups of white workers participated in violence against Negroes at Trumbull Park in Chicago and at Levittown, Pennsylvania. And in the South, workers have given considerable support to the White Citizens Councils and other groups seeking to perpetuate segregated institutions.

                  But trade union discrimination against the Negro is something more than the simple result of rank-and-file prejudices. To understand this one must make a distinction, in the history of the American labor movement, between economic and non-economic liberalism. Organized labor’s struggle for the right to bargain collectively, unemployment insurance, and minimum wage laws was a central part of the liberal program. But in non-economic matters—in such areas as civil liberties for political dissidents, and equality of opportunity for racial minorities—the practices of many important labor unions can hardly be described as liberal. Many unions have a long history of racial discrimination—and it is this tradition of discrimination which is responsible, at least in part, for the marginal status that Negro wage earners have today in key sectors of the American economy.

                  "Labor Unions and the Negro:The Record of Discrimination," by Herbert Hill, Commentary Magazine, Dec 1959
                  Think of the hundreds of thousands of skilled, unionized Caucasians over the years who, through the strength of their earnings, were able to borrow to build equity in homes, and send children to college. Their black contemporaries were denied those opportunities, so consequently their children were not able to attend college. That kind of cycle can last two, three or even four generations. That's an example of the kind of an unstated advantage that a fair number of Caucasians may enjoy over their African-American contemporaries.

                  The biggest disparity, at least in my observations, was the way in which the War on Drugs was prosecuted. Time and time again African-Americans were prosecuted for exactly the same kinds of minor offensives, like mere possession, that Caucasians were let off with simple verbal warnings. For many years, once a person had a drug offense on his record, no matter how minor, he'd be barred for years, or perhaps permanently, from from a good share of employment or educational opportunities. That, at least in my view, has been one of the greatest disadvantages foisted on African-Americans over the years.

                  Those are just a couple of examples that spring to mind. I have no doubt that there are others, possible quite subtle, disadvantages under which blacks regularly operate.
                  I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by Nichols View Post

                    Wrong again, I'm placing country before party.
                    No, you're not and you never have. And you continually support and defend a corrupt president.
                    We are not now that strength which in old days
                    Moved earth and heaven; that which we are we are; One equal temper of heroic hearts
                    Made weak by time and fate but strong in will
                    To strive to seek to find and not to yield.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Massena View Post

                      No, you're not and you never have. And you continually support and defend a corrupt president.
                      Stop being so dramatic.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        To answer the original post no

                        The problem is poor leader ship in America. We have seen a loss of millions of middle class union jobs which used to be filled by inner-city blacks and whites.
                        Long live the Lionheart! Please watch this video
                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=jRDwlR4zbEM
                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f3DBaY0RsxU
                        Accept the challenges so that you can feel the exhilaration of victory.

                        George S Patton

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          Here's a few other ways in which African-Americans may have been hobbled, either deliberately or inadvertently:
                          • slave owners deliberately inculcated in their slaves a distaste for personal liberty and personal responsibility, in an attempt to cultivate a preference for bondage over freedom. This effort was detailed by Frederick Douglass in his Autobiography of a Slave. The end result was a combination of distrust and apathy, which was interpreted as sloth and "shiftlessness";
                          • on average a slave could be expected to be sold or rented out at least once in his/her life, without regard to age or family situation, thus splitting up families and serving to estrange wives from husbands and children from parents;
                          • during the Antebellum period and Jim Crow, it was made plain through various means -- from the legalistic Dred Scott case to the destruction of Rosewood FL, that blacks could not be viewed as human beings, and that there was no point in even trying to overcome their inferior condition, lest such attempts when successful prompt whites to view them as "uppity" and in turn lynch them.
                          The above suffered by African-Americans over many successive generations, such that they ultimately leached into their "cultural DNA," so to speak.

                          The social, economic, and political changes that followed WW2 proved to be a two-sided coin. For a couple of negative developments:
                          • the mass marketing of the mechanical cotton picker ended the era of the sharecropper, thus rendering them economically redundant. In turn millions of Southern blacks migrated to the big cities of the North. There, rural people in the midst of modern American urban centers, like similar rural populations throughout the Industrial Revolution, found themselves cut off from previously known social support systems, but lacking relevant skills and knowledge they consequently suffered;
                          • the growth of the post-WW2 welfare state incentivized the erosion of familial and community relations, leaving its recipients socially adrift -- those are challenges facing both blacks and whites who were/are in similar social and economic straits over the last seventy years.
                          Here's a real wild one, one that I consider an unproven theory only, but observation prevents me from simply disregarding it out of hand, that attempts to actually breed slaves succeeded in reproducing the kinds of traits which slave-owners desired, but which are disadvantageous to free people: docility, apathy, intellectual incuriosity, poor self discipline. Slaves possessed of such characteristics won't remain slaves for long -- but a free man can't long last as free if his psyche is so afflicted. Those are exactly the kinds of traits that one would desire from a draft animal, a horse or an ox.

                          One alleged disadvantage that African-Americans claim effects them I roundly reject: that public education in big cities like New York has shortchanged black students. All public schools throughout the State of New York teach the same curricula, using the same methods and materials, and the teachers themselves are trained at the same institutions, regardless of the district in question, and within New York City, all public school teachers are compensated under the same pay grades. Indeed, NYC's Dept of Education tightly caps and closely scrutinizes parent fundraising for all public schools throughout The City. There is no tangible difference between a public school on the Upper East Side and a public school in Harlem. If public school students are being shortchanged -- which I believe that they are -- then they're being shortchanged equally, without regard to race, religion, or socio-economic status.
                          I was married for two ******* years! Hell would be like Club Med! - Sam Kinison

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Jutland View Post


                            So nothing of substance to refute my point then?


                            So you admit that democrats used the power of government to enforce racism?


                            define white privilege.
                            define how my comment confirms of denies it existence? (hint, it doesn't)

                            Or admit that you are simply trolling.
                            Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                            Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by G David Bock View Post

                              Not sure what your "point" was, other than to imply that "white privilege" was just a USA thing, in which case I may shown otherwise.

                              Racial/ethnic "privilege" tends to be something basic to human nature and pops out in nearly all cultures/countries.

                              Hop over to Japan and not be "Japanese" and experience "Japanese Privilege".

                              Go to India and experience "Indian Privilege" ...
                              ... or go to China and experience "Chinese Privilege" ...

                              Come to think of it, based on my experiences, both India and China have so many ethnics and cultural/language/cuisine/etc. differences that each 'Nation' has it's own multiple variations on regional/ethnic "privilege" = local bias factors.

                              Sort of like what a Connecticut (White)Yankee might experience when going to a Southern Alabama town where everyone(White) there has connections going back generations, but "the Yankee" might as well have purple skin and green hair when it comes to "acceptance" by the locals.

                              Which is what is really in consideration here. Hence my example of the "Scottish* Privilege" factor (* 'Home of the Vikings ).

                              Years ago I worked with a large group of co-workers from SE Asia. My fellow "white privilege", Liberal co-workers referred to them all as "rice eaters". Myself, having a bit of background with their region, knew they were more varied than that. While they would work side-by-side on the production floor, come break and lunch time they separated into local groups. Laotian at one table, Cambodian at another, Viets, at their own varied ones. I got to know them and discussed their regional/cultural backgrounds to point of being accepted in their company, such as a rare invite to join in celebrating the Asian New Year with them.


                              You are responding substantively to what seems to be little more than trolling.
                              Avatar is General Gerard, courtesy of Zouave.

                              Churchill to Chamberlain: you had a choice between war and dishonor. You chose dishonor, and you will have war.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                Originally posted by Nichols View Post

                                You presented a historical example of democrats action and want to blame everyone for it. The one guy interviewing current random people holds more weight than society did back in the 30s.

                                You presented something from 80-90 years ago to prove 'white privilage' I provided current interviews that shows today's reality.

                                Try again.
                                He actually presented a historical example of racism that affects people's lives even today and the usual suspects try to dismiss it by blaming only the democrats even though republicans also administered the relevant FHA programs and gave and received loans based on the color of the applicant's skin. And the article describes how the same thing happened after WWII.

                                African-American families that were prohibited from buying homes in the suburbs in the 1940s and '50s and even into the '60s, by the Federal Housing Administration, gained none of the equity appreciation that whites gained.

                                I would not be surprised if some of the old timers here who deny the modern effect of racism live in one of those houses from the 50's and 60's that was financed based on racism.
                                Last edited by pamak; 09 Jul 20, 15:02.
                                My most dangerous mission: I landed in the middle of an enemy tank battalion and I immediately, started spraying bullets killing everybody around me having fun up until my computer froze...

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X