The most prestigious law school admissions discussion board in the world.
|
 |
 
|
"Privilege" puts the focus on the wrong group
Poast new message in this thread
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:20 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish Why do shitlibs want to make people feel bad about their privilege rather than trying to uplift people so that everyone is privileged? Why not focus on the underprivileged people? The whole concept is all about making people feel guilty for something they weren't responsible for.
It used to be a good thing to have privileges--"Driving is a privilege, not a right." Now, instead of focusing on giving privileges to everyone, shitlibs want everyone to lose their privileges. The shitlib privilege discourse is explicitly about bringing people down rather than lifting people up. wtf |
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:39 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish The fact that the whole concept is based on "you can't see this because you have privilege" is also a problem--this makes it impossible to disprove the concept, rendering it meaningless (see privilege: ultimate lib flame thread) (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981464) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:43 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef it's another way of looking at the same thing, but it's easier for whites to get their heads around.
it's not realistic to raise everyone to the same level in terms of, e.g., sociohistorical advantages, so it's more important to be cognizant of inequalities that currently do exist and will exist for the foreseeable future. |
 |
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:47 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish The framing is exactly the problem. It's very confrontational and divisive. It's all about cutting people down and making them feel guilty. Whenever someone brings up privilege in a shitlib way, I know immediately that they're a huge asshole.
It seems much less effective at bringing people to your side as well--it seems like telling someone about how they should check all their privileges is just going to make them hate you. I suppose it's been effective enough for shitlibs lately, but I'd expect a backlash. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:49 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef you haven't provided an alternative that also manages to put the focus on white people. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981506) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:52 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish Why should the focus be on people who aren't racist, didn't do anything wrong, and had nothing to do with creating the system? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981523) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:58 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef we are all racist. that's a fact. proven more than your human biodiversity theories likely ever will be.
whether what they are doing is wrong is up for debate. but they benefit from an unfair system that should be changed. they have no incentive to recognize this system even exists, let alone work together to try to change it, until the focus is on them and how they have benefited from this sytem. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:04 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish Separatism is the cr to this issue, by the way. You will never be happy with different groups who end up with different outcomes.
Anyway, I'm telling you that the concept of privilege is divisive and will drive people away, whereas the concept of uplifting people who need it is a more appealing, positive concept that people can agree on. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:17 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef you have no basis to say that unequal outcomes are inevitably an issue in the absence of centuries of brutal oppression by one group over another. you have no basis at all to say that, it's just idle speculation by an intellectually dishonest, lazy white idiot.
and to the second point, you want to make the message solely about getting minorities to change THEIR behaviors because it makes you uncomfortable to acknowledge the ways you've benefited from the same system that caused their suffering. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:23 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish "you have no basis to say that unequal outcomes are inevitably an issue in the absence of centuries of brutal oppression by one group over another. you have no basis at all to say that, it's just idle speculation by an intellectually dishonest, lazy white idiot."
I have to say, this is one of the dumbest statements I've ever seen on xo. Congrats!
Regarding the second point, no, I'm telling you what would be more effective at actually helping people. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:26 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef you truly are a racist white idiot if you think that any racial inequality at all is the problem, rather than extreme racial inequality in light of past and current abuses. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981718) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:40 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king What the fuck is so dumb about that? Your belief that unequal outcomes are an inevitable product of genetics is more clearly based on blind faith than anything in the privilege narrative. Your angry outbursts against people challenging these beliefs are telling. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981772) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:42 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur "clearly"
LJL OWAS! |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:45 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king That was an appropriate usage, tardboy. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981791) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:50 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur LULZ! It was a declaration with no evidence offered whatsoever in support, with baseless degrees of "clarity" compared as the sole means of trying to prove a point. It's the single laziest argumentative technique there is. Still think it was "appropriate?" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981830) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:52 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef well when it's clear, what else are you supposed to say?
i didn't mean that in the absence of past abuses, there wouldn't be any racial inequality, just that it wouldn't be the major ISSUE that it is in our current world.
it's because blacks have been put in chains and held as second class citizens for centuries that the current racial inequalities matter so much and incite so much suspicion and outrage. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:58 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur You are supposed to provide evidence for why it's clear. Explain how there is less empirical evidence for HBD than there is for the least empirically supported tenet of the privilege narrative. In a general sense, if you think X has characteristic "A" more than Y does and somebody else doesn't, stating "X is clearly more A than Y" just makes you look intellectually impotent. Does that make sense now, "tardboy?" (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981862) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:59 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef no, if it requires evidence then the statement is not clear
are you retarded or something? |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:06 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
I'm literally laughing at you trying to save face by asking if I'm retarded after you were gaped this hard. The statement you said was clear was at the heart of the dispute between you and fucklaw. I can't stop LOLing at the fact you think your claim that HBD is "more clearly" based on blind faith than the least empirically supported tenet of the privilege narrative does any intellectual work for you. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:10 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king Did you just stop reading at the term "clearly," dumbass? I offered evidence in that he never defends his position and instead gets mad at people for challenging him. It's not perfect evidence, but considering I was speculating about his motives, it's about as good as we could hope for. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981926) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:12 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur "no, if it requires evidence the statement is not clear"
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
What was it liked getting dinged from HYS, little breh? |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:14 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king You're aren't quoting me, retard. This subthread includes three pumos. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981956) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:18 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur You still seem to think your use of "more clearly" did work for you, yet you call me a retard. Why? Also, LOL at some shitlib talking about privilege calling someone a retard. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981975) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:22 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king Good God you're a mess. I'm the guy arguing against "privilege" for a huge part of the thread. It's not great writing, but we're on a bort where shit like LOL is acceptable and there wasn't anything technically wrong with it. Your insistence on perfect writing here is TTT as fuck. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981997) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:25 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur I'm not arguing for perfect writing, I'm LOLing at your use of "more clearly" as an argumentative tool and your insistence that it was used appropriately. Keep tossing out ad homs though champ! I'm a mess, I'm a tardboy, I'm a retard. What else do you have for me? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982014) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:26 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king There was nothing incorrect about it. At worst, it added nothing much like your presence in this thread. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982021) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:27 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur At best, it was devastating SCHOLARSHIP that pwned fucklaw, amirite? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982034) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:52 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king You're still complaining about style alone. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982226) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:15 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur Don't backtrack breh, that overwhelming evidence makes your use of "clearly" PURE SCHOLARSHIP (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981962) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:16 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king Still pretending I'm the same as the other pumo? Maybe if you type "LOL" enough times we won't notice how dumb you are. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981965) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:20 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur Yes, focus on my failure to confirm each pumo was the same in each post in the thread, and keep making points by saying that X is "more clear" than Y. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981988) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:22 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king Protip: your writing style sounds a lot dumber than mine. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982005) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:26 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur It "clearly" does, amirite? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982022) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:11 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef i wasn't the one who used "clearly", i'm just saying that the usage of "clearly" implies that the statement requires no evidence because... it's clear. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981941) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:21 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur And the dude who said it disagrees with you. LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981993) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:22 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef i don't care... maybe it's a lawyer's convention of using the word clearly. i'm telling you what my understanding is.
there's no point in saying clearly if you're going to provide evidence. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:29 PM Author: Charismatic buck-toothed kitchen voyeur I agree with you breh, hence my utter pwnage of the other pumo.
I'd add the caveat that if you don't have evidence, simply stating that a controversial statement is "clearly" true makes you look foolish. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:54 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king lol @ anything you've said being pwnage. I get that your freshman year English prof wrote all over your paper when you wrote "clearly," but it's an ultimately meaningless stylistic complaint, and you look foolish for trying to make a big deal out of it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982235) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:00 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish You're effectively blaming whites for the shittyness of Africa here. Ethiopia wasn't colonized, yet it's still a shithole. You're just wrong about where the fault for racial inequality lies. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981866) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:03 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef *picks up a destitute child from the street*
*enslaves him, beats him, rapes him*
*kicks him back onto the street when you have no more use for him*
*doesn't feel an ounce of guilt because "he would have starved anyways"* |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:04 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish Nobody alive today had anything to do with slavery. I sincerely hope that helps. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981884) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:06 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef you broadened the scope to abstract races in your previous post, now you want to narrow it to individuals.
i already said how, as a white individual, you benefit from the system that enslaved blacks and kept them down for many decades after that. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:11 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish You just referred to the individual in the post I replied to.
Really, I had nothing to do with slavery. I had nothing to do with keeping blacks down in any way. Slavery fucked over a lot of whites at the time by devaluing labor, actually, and it has disastrous consequences on America today. The people who brought the slaves over from Africa were awful, but I have nothing to do with them. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:14 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef oh geez thanks for letting us know that you didn't actually bring slaves over from africa. thanks for that.
i don't know why i need to repeat myself in this thread so many times but i'll do it once more for your sake.
to the extent that you benefited from this system, you should feel bad that you were born lucky and others weren't. to the extent that you refuse to lift a finger to help change the system, and in your attempts to obfuscate as well as in other actions, you are in fact supporting and perpetuating the system, then you should feel not only bad, but guilty of something. maybe not something huge like acting as a slave-trader, but something nonetheless. and that's the core point of privilege. thank you very much for your attention. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:30 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish The idea that whites today benefit from slavery is also just wrong. Any inheritances from that time only affect a small percentage of the population and are quite attenuated by taxes over the years. Where's the benefit to most whites? For that matter, the black population is a net burden on whites today--just look at crime rates and social welfare spending.
I can agree with you that we should work to prevent institutions and society from exploiting people now, but this has little to do with feeling guilt about my ancestors. Generally, you are arguing that some people are responsible for others' actions, and I can't agree with you about that either. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:46 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef the whole idea of privilege is that every white person benefits from a slew of small subtle things that together accumulate into something big. and these small subtle things, such as teachers being more willing to mentor them in a classroom as a result of implicit racial bias, are in some way descended from more overt institutions of racism like slavery and segregation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982189) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 8:09 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish Fundamentally, you're arguing for personal moral culpability for the actions of others. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982343) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:31 PM Author: Rose native bbw "to the extent that you benefited from this system, you should feel bad that you were born lucky and others weren't." Why should I feel bad that I was born lucky? I don't feel bad Bill Gates was born to the son of a rich motherfucking biglaw partner, and I don't feel bad that the middle class black kid who had every advantage I did didn't do as well in school because getting good grades is "acting white" Yes, I feel bad for people born into shitty situations. But I don't feel bad that I was born into a marginally less shitty situation. "to the extent that you refuse to lift a finger to help change the system . . . you are in fact supporting and perpetuating the system" Why? "then you should feel not only bad, but guilty of something. maybe not something huge like acting as a slave-trader, but something nonetheless" Lol how am I supposed to feel bad about something when you, as the proponent, literally cannot identify it yourself? |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:22 PM Author: Scarlet stirring den marketing idea There are lots of people still enslaved in Africa and Asia, actually. It's only Western and Westernized societies that have abandoned slavery. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982001) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:31 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish Sure. I was referring to the US institution. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982065) |
|
Date: September 3rd, 2013 2:51 AM Author: Scarlet stirring den marketing idea That kind of referencing leads people to think that slavery was somehow unique to America, a singular American institution invented and perpetuated by whites, rather than an institution found in all races, of which the West is notable only for having outlawed it earlier than the rest of the world. (Far more people are enslaved today than were freed in the American Civil War.) It's this weird ethno-centrism that leads to ethno-hate.
|
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:44 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef also you mention that it's shifting attention onto the people who have privilege rather than those who don't have it, and that's precisely the point. liberals want to bring the discussion to white people, because white people for so long have tried to dodge it and avoid the issue. there is no way to situate white people in this society, as a race, except to say that they are privileged. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981484) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:47 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king Why do we need to generalize about groups of people as a race? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981493) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:48 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef because we do not live in a race blind society and race still matters. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981500) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:48 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king But why should we make group generalizations instead of dealing with race on an individual basis? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981505) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:50 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef because we still view the world in terms of race... (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981510) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:51 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king Individuals view individuals in terms of race. That doesn't mean we need to have a macro level discourse that includes racial generalizations. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981516) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:52 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef a macro level discourse necessarily uses generalizations
why should we not have any macros level discourses? |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:52 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king Because those generalizations are useless and destructive when applied to individuals. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981525) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:55 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef generalizations are inevitable. racism is a generalization, as is anti-racism. this whole "treat every single person as an untainted individual" is a fantasy and we aren't there yet. we should strive for the good generalizations, not the bad ones. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981545) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:57 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king You're far too pessimistic. Some people generalize less than others. You're never going to eliminate racism in a highly race-conscious environment, and it's more productive to strive for ignoring racial generalizations altogether. We're not there yet, but generalizing in any way isn't a path that leads there. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981552) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:49 PM Author: Swashbuckling generalized bond blood rage because certain races are generally doing far worse than others
|
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:50 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king Race is pretty meaningless social construct. Why should it matter how average performance of one artificial drawn group compares to average performance of another? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981512) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:52 PM Author: Swashbuckling generalized bond blood rage when one race is systematically disenfranchised for hundreds of years, it does matter -- assuming the society who disenfranchised that minority takes a moralistic stance on addressing the adversity said group faces (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981524) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:55 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king That's a circular argument. A society that "takes a moralistic stance on addressing the adversity said group faces" is already comparing groups. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981542) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:59 PM Author: Swashbuckling generalized bond blood rage your arguments seems to lie on the assumption that we have no reason to consider race in our society
when a group is enslaved and marginalized strictly because of their race, it doesn't make sense to ignore race now -- especially when that group is still reeling from the effects of previous institutionalized racism
|
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:04 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king My arguments lie on the assumption that considering race as a society is inevitably destructive and divisive. The fact that historical race-consciousness has still left a trail of destruction on its worst victims is all the more reason to remove race from public discourse altogether. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:06 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef you're the race that is currently on top, so yeah you think we should stop thinking about race altogether because it's just making the oppressed races unhappy with their lot.
how convenient that you would say this.
we are all race blind now, so race doesn't matter anymore. post-racial america, amiright? |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:08 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king We're not race blind, and the steps we're taking are making Americans even more race-consciousness. Consider two groups of white kids. One is raised with constant discussion of race, with an emphasis on white privilege and historical discrimination against minorities. The second is raised with little mention of race at all, and chastised if they emphasize race over other characteristics. Which group do you think will show less implicit bias later in life? |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:10 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef there's a difference between using race as a concept in order to end racism because of the fact that race is ALREADY in the popular consciousness, between that and promoting race as an inherently important quality in and of itself. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981637) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:14 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king There's a difference in motive, but not necessarily in result. You're never going to take race out of the popular consciousness by talking about it more, and that should be the ultimate goal. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981664) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:19 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef and you can't get people to address their IMPLICIT racial biases (which are very real, have been proven over and over) unless you talk about race in a serious and honest way. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981687) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:22 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king Why do you think that? It seems more reasonable to believe that people who talk and hear about race frequently are more likely to view a stranger as a black man rather than as just a man, and are therefore more likely to exhibit implicit bias towards him. Implicit biases are very real, but they're also an argument for eliminating racial discourse. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:28 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef because the dominant racial discourse is precisely that race doesn't matter, and yet over decades it doesn't seem that racial biases are just going to go away of their own accord. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981726) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:31 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king We haven't had so much as a month that didn't include public discourse involving racial generalizations. We can't say ignoring race doesn't work, because we've never made any serious effort to do so. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:36 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef i doubt that racial chatter on the news is heavily influencing people's attitudes in either direction. the prevailing cultural attitude is that race doesn't matter and shouldn't be talked about in people's lives, and this is what people have been operating under for a long time now.
besides, i don't think it's desirable to erase the concept of race from our consciousness altogether. racial thinking provides a source of identity and diversity to the world. in and of itself, it's a good thing. rather, the goal should be to stem the perverse effects of racial thinking, and part of that is to address the undeniable problems we have had in the past that continue to fester in more hidden and subtle forms today. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:44 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king I'm convinced it has had an impact, but I doubt we're going to find evidence to settle the issue either way. The attitude that race doesn't matter has played an important role in society over the past few decades, and racism has also drastically diminished over that period. Serious problems remain, but we've done something(s) that work. Racial identity may have a some useful place in an ideal society, but I think racial generalizations are too destructive to ever be promoted without promoting problems from the past. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:50 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef i don't think anyone is really considering the eradication of race from our consciousness. even MLK when he said people should be judged by the content of their character, really meant that we shouldn't let race cloud our judgments, not that it should disappear from our minds completely. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981827) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:10 PM Author: Swashbuckling generalized bond blood rage I look at race and AA this way:
All the races are running a 100m sprint. Whites have been running for a long time, they're 3/4 of the way finished. Blacks just started running. Sure, both groups are now running full speed, but one group clearly had a huge and insurmountable head start.
To point to the fact that both groups are running and say, "Look! everyone is participating, everything is fine!" is deeply flawed. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:12 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king That's a silly and demonstrably false way to look at it. Some whites were born ahead, but these days some blacks were too, and some whites are born in poverty. Impoverished whites aren't 3/4 of the way finished with anything, nor are wealthy black families starting at the beginning of the track. This is exactly the kind of misconception that inhibits racial progress. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:14 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish cr. The best way to make race less important is to stop focusing on race. Everything else has a very bad record of making things worse. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981666) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:17 PM Author: Swashbuckling generalized bond blood rage We can all point to personal anecdotes in our everyday lives, but that does not invalidate general trends among the races.
http://cdn.theatlantic.com/newsroom/img/posts/Screen%20Shot%202013-08-28%20at%203.23.38%20PM.png |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:18 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king By your logic we should also racially profile blacks as likely criminals. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981681) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:19 PM Author: Swashbuckling generalized bond blood rage No. Blacks don't need to be marginalized anymore than they have been in the past.
We, as a society, have an obligation to help blacks reach for greater economic equality and independence. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:21 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king Why does society have that obligation? Because blacks are more likely to be poor? Blacks are also more likely to commit crimes. If we're going to take action motivated by racial generalizations, isn't that a reasonable one to act on as well? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981695) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:25 PM Author: Swashbuckling generalized bond blood rage Society has that obligation because our society disenfranchised blacks. The repercussions of NOT trying to reverse the adverse effects of Jim Crow and slavery would more than likely, be far, far worse than what we see today. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981715) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:30 PM Author: narrow-minded philosopher-king Our society isn't made up of the people who did those things. It seems difficult for any reasonable system of justice to allow a man's crimes to create obligations for his descendants multiple generations out, for immigrants to his location, and for descendants of immigrants to that location. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981734) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:59 PM Author: Scarlet stirring den marketing idea Do you know who FIRST disenfranchised blacks? Polygynous hoe-farming societies in Sub-Saharan Africa where excess black males were sold off as slaves. Why not have the hypergamous women and their polygynous husbands who created and benefited from these societies reverse the effects of selling their unwanted men into slavery for thousands of years?
Western society also disenfranchised Ashkenazi Jews. Let's talk about how the Holocaust resulted in Jews being completely excluded from science and all high-paying professions.
Wait, that never happened. Disenfranchisement as an explanation for different levels of economic development is completely contradicted by actual history. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:18 PM Author: Sadistic hairraiser mood weed whacker cr (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981971) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:52 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish Shitlibs decided knew they had nowhere left to go with overt racism, so had to come up with something to explain why black people are doing so poorly. Obviously if we assume that everyone is biologically equal, the problems must stem from bad things white people are doing--hence "privilege". Obviously this is completely wrong since the assumption that people are biologically equal is wrong. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981519) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:54 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef you don't have to believe in biological equality to believe in the idea of privilege. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981536) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:57 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish The idea that some people are lucky because, for example, they were born in America rather than Uganda, is fine. The idea that people should feel guilty about this is the problem. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981558) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:00 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef not a problem at all, it is the only moral view to have. if you're born lucky in a way that another person suffers simply because they were not born lucky, yes you should feel bad about it. and if you ignored this situation for your entire life because you benefited from it and thereby grew complacent and blind to the unfair misery of others, then yes you should feel guilty about it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981577) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:06 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish They're not suffering because you were born in a situation with less suffering. They're suffering because they were born in a situation with suffering. You are completely irrelevant. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981612) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:07 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef lol, what?
are you dumb or something?
we have a system in place whereby some people are lucky and don't suffer, and others are unlucky and do suffer. insomuch as you are a beneficiary of the system, you should feel bad. insomuch as you don't take steps to change the system, you should feel guilty. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:08 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish I'm responding to your implication that I should feel guilty that I was born here rather than in Uganda. The truth is that I am irrelevant to their suffering. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981625) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:08 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef we have a system in place whereby some people are lucky and don't suffer, and others are unlucky and do suffer. insomuch as you are a beneficiary of the system, you should feel bad. insomuch as you don't take steps to change the system, you should feel guilty. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981629) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:10 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish I'm not even involved in a system that's making Ugandan's suffer. You're completely abrogating their personal responsibility. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981639) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:15 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef you benefit from the systems that caused blacks in america to suffer, and that (more indirectly) caused ugandans to suffer. maybe you don't want to talk about ugandans, that's fine. privilege has mostly been applied to minorities here at home. surely you can't abrogate YOUR responsibility to do something, even if it's small, to change the system that gave you the tremendous privileges with which you were born, while leaving minorities in a greatly inferior position.
it's not either-or. you can get whites to stop being ignorant and complacent, while at the same time exhoriting minorities to step it up. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:21 PM Author: Scarlet stirring den marketing idea No, most whites in America aren't benefiting in any way from the oppression of blacks. If anything, most whites just try not to interact with blacks on a practical basis, living in mostly white neighborhoods, going to mostly white schools, aspiring to work in mostly-white professions, marrying other whites, raising other whites, and, when not legally forbidden, hiring other whites. The only time whites commonly interact with blacks is when trying to teach them or arresting them (and even anti-racist folks like Tim Wise admit that the % of blacks in prison closely reflects the % who actually commit crimes.)
White society was not built by oppressing minorities (whereby 'oppression' we mean 'ignoring') but by white people actually building a society. Asians and Jews do well in white society despite oppression because they, too, have worked hard to build a society.
I work in my multi-ethnic neighborhood to make a nice neighborhood with a high standard of living for everyone here. I am not responsible for other people in other neighborhoods who do not make their neighborhoods nice. I am not going to go to their neighborhood and water their trees and weed their yards and fix their broken shit.
Please do show me where I have personally benefited from the suffering of Ugandans--or the suffering of anyone. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:35 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef did america benefit from the labor and resources of non-white people? do you benefit from being an american? i rest my case.
i'm not saying it makes you equivalent to being a slaveholder, but it should make you reflect.
and even if you benefited precisely zero from the subjugation of minorities (which is highly unlikely), to the extent that the system we have is currently unfair to them, then it is your implicit responsibility to try to do something to remedy that. sure you don't have to, but a decent person would try to see if it's true and if there's something they can do to help. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:38 PM Author: Sadistic hairraiser mood weed whacker I'm confused. How does a random white american who in some thirdhand way benefits from historical international exploitation benefit any more than a random black american? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982123) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:42 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef the advancement of american interests was historically equivalent to the advancement of white american interests.
because whites were in power and received the benefits of its prosperity more than people of color.
not every single white person benefited materially from this, surely, but every white person did benefit in the sense that the subjugation of minorities within america increased his status in the narrow racial sense that as a white man he can do more things and be looked upon with more dignity than an equivalent man of color. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:45 PM Author: Sadistic hairraiser mood weed whacker How, pray tell, does a white immigrant, or the child of white immigrants benefit from your "historical equivalency" any more than people of color?
Your use of past tense is obnoxious. Yes, white people in the past benefitted from American expansionism more than black people. If we had a time machine, this would make a difference for people living in the modern day. Unfortunately, time machines don't exist.
Today, America's dominant status in the world benefits American blacks at least as much as it benefits American whites. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:48 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef the whole idea of privilege is that every white person benefits from a slew of small subtle things that together accumulate into something big. and these small subtle things, such as teachers being more willing to mentor them in a classroom as a result of implicit racial bias, are in some way descended from more overt institutions of racism like slavery and segregation. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982198) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:49 PM Author: Sadistic hairraiser mood weed whacker The whole idea of privilege, in other words, is bullshit. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982202) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:51 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef makes sense to me bro (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982218) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:58 PM Author: Sadistic hairraiser mood weed whacker The idea that *teachers*, a group of people who have uniformly been educated in post-60's social justice-obsessed liberal arts departments, and who blindly vote democrat in lockstep, favor white students over black students because of America's racist history is fucking laughable.
Then again, so is the rest of this idiocy. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:59 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef dude that's just an example. that you would treat it as the entirety of the argument, is flat out ridiculous.
and the fact is, everyone has strong implicit racial biases. that's a fact bro. you are running up against a well known fact in psychology, which is also common sense to non-reptiles. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 8:02 PM Author: Sadistic hairraiser mood weed whacker Your argument literally changes with every post.
I agree regarding implicit racial bias. But that has *NOTHING* to do with the historical argument you were advancing ITT. |
|
Date: September 3rd, 2013 2:46 AM Author: Scarlet stirring den marketing idea Asians and Jews are clearly getting better SAT scores than whites because teachers like them best. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23984826) |
|
Date: September 3rd, 2013 2:44 AM Author: Scarlet stirring den marketing idea 1. We're talking about black folks, not 'non-whites'.
2. Did "America" benefit from the enslavement of black folks 150 years ago? Probably not. The vast, vast majority of people didn't own slaves, but the average person in slave-holding areas suffered from depressed wages due to slavery. Tellingly, the slave-holding regions of the country were economically less-advanced than the abolitionist states.
3. Did any of the wealth obtained by slaveholders in the 1800s accrue to modern day society? No; the Civil War destroyed the South, and it remains economically less developed than the North to this day.
4. Has "America" benefited from the labor of blacks since the Civil War? Unlikely. Most of the "oppression" of black folks these days consists of white folks simply trying to avoid them. I am not benefited by avoiding someone; at best it's neutral, at worst, I spend effort on avoiding them. Whites must nevertheless pay to educate blacks, give them welfare, and pay to imprison disproportionate #s of black criminals, while large swathes of urban infrastructure are rendered unusable by anyone who doesn't want to get mugged or assaulted. Sounds like a bad bargain to me.
5. Do I benefit from being an American? Probably not; I could have been born in just about any European country and a few Asian ones, none of which historically had Africans minorities to oppress, and enjoy the exact same standard of living as I enjoy here. European and Asian cultures did not get where they are by oppressing black people, but by working hard to make their societies nice places to live.
6. Do black folks benefit, today, from being Americans? IDK. On the one hand, I think people are happier and have more dignity in societies where they're part of the majority. On the other hand, mass famine, genocide, slaver, and cannibalism are still realities in Africa.
It makes me reflect that privilege-mongers are completely full of shit.
If my neighbor plants a beautiful garden, and I sit on my ass and grow weeds, when she has a pile of fresh veggies and I still have weeds, do I complain that she didn't hire me to work in her garden? No, I plant my own damn garden.
How is the current system unfair to black people in the US? Are they being imprisoned disproportionate to their crime rates? Are they required to have higher SAT scores than whites and Asians to get into college? Are they discriminated against in gov't hiring?
Did the Ashkenazim need AA to invent pretty much all of modern science just before the Germans tried to wipe them off the face of the planet? No. Did Germany benefit from the Holocaust? No. By your logic, Jews should be the poorest folks in the world.
I already believe in helping the less fortunate and treating people as individuals, not stereotypes. Not because of your arguments or some warped sense of historical guilt and self-loathing, but because that's how I think all humans should operate. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 5:57 PM Author: Glittery Rough-skinned Turdskin Stag Film privileged is something that is invented by people to rationalize their degenerate behaviors
of course inequality exists - but privilege can be applied to fucking anything - no one has to feel sorry for having some sort of advantages as long as they obey the golden rule and are tolerant.
Of course libs are some of the most intolerant, racist and bigoted people I've even encountered so its no surprise that they don't behave in a rational manner. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:11 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish .......,,....,,...,.......,.,...,.,.,.,., must be WLMAS
Great example of a party line shitlib here. |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 6:37 PM Author: seedy business firm roast beef sorry you got pwned in your own thread brah
you're a lightweight little breh |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:06 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish I really do appreciate that you're giving a good example of the shitlib party line here. It should be educational to anyone not already familiar with it. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981902) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:08 PM Author: spectacular useless brakes son of senegal he's a lot smarter than WLMAS (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23981914) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:22 PM Author: brass zombie-like sneaky criminal university fucklaw you so obviously don't know the literature it's impossible to engage with this. do you only read blogs? (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982002) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:24 PM Author: Sadistic hairraiser mood weed whacker "The literature" = modern day shitlib sophistry. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982012) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:25 PM Author: brass zombie-like sneaky criminal university with which fucklaw is trying to engage. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982019) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:31 PM Author: Scarlet stirring den marketing idea Any argument which requires years of expensive training in ideological "literature" (ie, shitlib college courses and academic discourses,) is a form of elitist oppression because it has been made for the idle rich, by the idle rich. How anyone thinks any actual end to oppression is going to come out of rich people being elitist is beyond me. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982059) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:37 PM Author: Sadistic hairraiser mood weed whacker CR. The "you didn't read XYZ literature assigned in Gender Studies 401, so surely, you can't speak with intelligence about social issues" argument is the single most obnoxious shitlib argument. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982113) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 8:18 PM Author: thriller know-it-all jew nowag ah yes the classic marxist struggle (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982397) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:56 PM Author: thriller know-it-all jew nowag how are you defining privilege here (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23982242) |
|
Date: September 2nd, 2013 7:57 PM Author: Chartreuse range multi-billionaire white
straight
middle class and above
male
Everything else is a sign of oppression |
|
Date: September 3rd, 2013 3:02 AM Author: Scarlet stirring den marketing idea You forgot cis and neurotypical. (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23984866) |
|
Date: September 3rd, 2013 7:01 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23987629) |
|
Date: September 4th, 2013 1:50 PM Author: plum wild parlor death wish (http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=2352644&forum_id=2#23991715) |