White Privilege versus White Guilt


#61

[quote=“Zune, post:59, topic:34527”]
Government in this issue is very much indeed “leadership”, and ensuring that I (a white person) cannot legally keep, trade, or use africans as slaves is a preservation of those africans’ rights as human beings. The same goes for states rights in this matter, as it wasn’t federal law that you cannot segregate your citizens by race until about a half century ago. Enacting this law and preserving this leadership was the very point of those civil rights struggles.
[/quote]Protecting the rights of human beings against aggression is not leadership. It’s the purpose for government. If you’re talking about equal treatment before the law, then you are in harmony with what I said.

[quote=“Zune, post:59, topic:34527”]
And as far as “setting things right” goes, there are minorities of people who are still treated remarkably poorly by society and there is absolutely nothing wrong with trying to minimize or eliminate this.
[/quote]Depends on what you mean by minimizing and eliminating as well as “poor” treatment. If you mean the government should protect their unalienable rights, then I agree with you. If you think they should be given preferential treatment, the I strongly disagree with you, and you have not made a good enough case to sway me to your opinion. But I really don’t know what you’re advocating here.

[quote=“Zune, post:59, topic:34527”]
The disabled are a great example: They are far better off than they were before as now most businesses are required by law to make their institutions handicapped accessible, but people still see differently-abled folks as being helpless, gross, or otherwise undesirable. Notice how many of your friends use the word “retarded” to mean “ridiculous”, or how mean in general they are to disabled folks. There’s still a ways to go for disabled acceptance, but at least they’re eons ahead of where they used to be because the government “set things right”.
[/quote]I don’t know anyone who I know is generally mean to disabled folks. As for your defense of ADA, requiring a man who is making modifications to his own property to build a ramp to serve one customer with a wheelchair is idiotic and a violation of the property owner’s rights.

[quote=“Zune, post:59, topic:34527”]
As for folks who are black, I don’t know of a program by the government that specifically tries to set things right for them based on their race. But if it exists, I’m not to concerned about it as it doesn’t affect me. I’m white and (at least biologically) male. I already have all the rights, and those rights aren’t a zero-sum resource. Someone getting more rights isn’t going to give me less rights.
[/quote]Tell that to the gay folks who want to get married. Heteros with more rights won’t give them less rights.

And for blacks, Affirmative Action doesn’t come to mind? Enrollment quotas? All things being equal, the minority is hired? Really? You’ve never heard of this? You really think it’s OK for one citizen to have fewer rights than another? Weren’t you just supporting the opposite contention? How can you make the arguments you’ve been making if you don’t believe that rights are equal? I, of course, think that everyone has the same rights; but you are now confusing me with your shifting premise.

Btw, if someone does have more “rights” than you, and those “rights” are positive, they do cost you something. You do lose something.


#62

lmao

But when the aggression is perpetrated based on factors that cannot be changed by the victim, such as age, sex, ability, etc., I think it’s pretty fair to say that somebody in charge should step in and say to the oppressors, “Hey! You can’t do that. That’s wrong.” Because to sit idly by and watch your minority citizens be screwed based on unchangeable factors is really unfair to them. Just like their majority counterparts, they are citizens so the government are ethically obligated to consider their rights.

Depends on what you mean by minimizing and eliminating as well as “poor” treatment. If you mean the government should protect their unalienable rights, then I agree with you. If you think they should be given preferential treatment, the I strongly disagree with you, and you have not made a good enough case to sway me to your opinion. But I really don’t know what you’re advocating here.

But here’s the deal: being a part of an oppressed minority – such as being physically disabled – laws stating that employers must legally consider you alongside your “able” counterparts is not being treated “preferentially”. That’s a legal statement saying that you must be treated equally and fairly before the law. The same goes for being black. If there’s any law on the books that officially says “Black people have more legal rights than white people”, then I’d sure as heck would like to see it.

I don’t know anyone who I know is generally mean to disabled folks. As for your defense of ADA, requiring a man who is making modifications to his own property to build a ramp to serve one customer with a wheelchair is idiotic and a violation of the property owner’s rights.

If it was a private property used by an individual, there would definitely be an objection to the ADA forcing them to install ramps at their cost. However, these are places of business, government, etc. that are provided for public usage. You could argue that this infringes upon his right as a business owner, I suppose. But that small infringement of a “right” (because I know of no such right that allows you to build or maintain a building that does not adhere to government-set safety standards) ensures that many more have the ability to use their store and buy goods that they could possibly need. That means it’s a solution that benefits more people than it hurts. When you have a solution that is more beneficial for everyone, there is no moral argument.

And as stated before, there is no legal document allowing you to purchase land and build a structure for public usage that does not meet government-set codes. That’s total baloney.

Btw, if someone does have more “rights” than you, and those “rights” are positive, they do cost you something. You do lose something.

What, exactly?


#63

[quote=“Zune, post:62, topic:34527”]
But when the aggression is perpetrated based on factors that cannot be changed by the victim, such as age, sex, ability, etc., I think it’s pretty fair to say that somebody in charge should step in and say to the oppressors, “Hey! You can’t do that. That’s wrong.” Because to sit idly by and watch your minority citizens be screwed based on unchangeable factors is really unfair to them. Just like their majority counterparts, they are citizens so the government are ethically obligated to consider their rights.
[/quote]What are you talking about? Aggression and rights violations are simple concepts. I don’t know what you are arguing here. Are you disagreeing with something I said?

[quote=“Zune, post:62, topic:34527”]
But here’s the deal: being a part of an oppressed minority – such as being physically disabled – laws stating that employers must legally consider you alongside your “able” counterparts is not being treated “preferentially”. That’s a legal statement saying that you must be treated equally and fairly before the law. The same goes for being black. If there’s any law on the books that officially says “Black people have more legal rights than white people”, then I’d sure as heck would like to see it.
[/quote]Any admission quota, any special hiring status. You’ve never heard of affirmative action? Hate crimes law?

[quote=“Zune, post:62, topic:34527”]
If it was a private property used by an individual, there would definitely be an objection to the ADA forcing them to install ramps at their cost. However, these are places of business, government, etc. that are provided for public usage. You could argue that this infringes upon his right as a business owner, I suppose. But that small infringement of a “right” (because I know of no such right that allows you to build or maintain a building that does not adhere to government-set safety standards) ensures that many more have the ability to use their store and buy goods that they could possibly need. That means it’s a solution that benefits more people than it hurts. When you have a solution that is more beneficial for everyone, there is no moral argument.
[/quote]I’m talking about private property. Businesses are private property regardless of whether you or anyone else believes there is a right to access the private property. Just because a citizen enters private property where many other citizens do business does not make it public property. What exactly is the difference between my house and my business? What dilutes my authority over my own property when it’s a business? I’m a photographer who does business with other individuals. Does my camera belong to you? Can you reasonably tell me what to do with it without violating my rights? What’s the difference between that and my building?

That a law or government-set safety standard dictates what they build does not justify it morally at all. There is a moral argument. The utilitarian justification you suggest is lacking. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one or the few. It’s a horrible approach to deciding what’s right and wrong. The government says so, therefore it’s right is also a horrible argument.

[quote=“Zune, post:62, topic:34527”]
What, exactly?
[/quote]A right to education. A right to housing. A right to food. A right to healthcare. You may not use them. If they are provided at your expense against your will, you lose something. But I don’t recognize “positive” rights as rights – and it is impossible for anyone to have more actual “rights” than anyone else. It is possible through bad reasoning (utilitarian or just because we care or whatever) to suggest that some folks ought to have more stuff at the expense of others. It happens all the time. That’s one of the main things our government does, and in the process it violates the rights of other men.


#64

And, Zune, I still don’t understand what your original comments today had to do with this:

I do. Let the government become color blind while as individuals we continue promoting the idea that a man should be measured by the content of his character not the color of his skin. Let’s stop dwelling on race and encourage our friends and family to do the same.
What were you taking issue with? Or were you just trying to argue for the sake of it? Do you think what I said here is a bad idea? You said it’s getting there without the work, yet I suggested how to deal with it as free people.

Is there something wrong with not dwelling on race and encouraging our friends and family to do the same?

Is there something wrong with measuring a man by the content of his character, as described by MLK, and not the color of his skin?

Is there something wrong with a color blind government, a government that treats people as if their rights, their authority, were equal?


#65

You know hard and like a few, FEW folks you rose above it all, I salute you!

I got white guilt, hell I got it so bad that I will buy any black a one way ticket to get them back to their homeland, in bammy’s case I will send via first class hot and smokin E or W bound, just name it and be sure to leave you citizenship papers with the flight attendant taking ticks.

Me will I came from privileged parents. My daddy died and left me his good name and a set of values worth more than all the money in the world, I was an orphan and adopted by the best mom and dad there was. Dad taught me hard work and stand up for whats right, I learned to wear steel toe boots and learned to wear a time in the board room, I can make a living with a welders helmet or a computer.

I started a business to pay my way thru college and have started several since, one was a computer engineering firm, another a welding a fabrication shop AFTER I sold my Computer company and I was the chief welder-fabricator.

I have had as many as 175 top engineers working for me and I never cared what color, race, religion, sex or sexual orientation, I did care when they came to work or when they went home, whether they dressed in suit and tie or surf shorts, my only requirement was RESULTS on TIME.

I am not rich, but not poor and I did it all on my own, never borrowed a dime, never got a business loan and the GOVT did NOT start or help me in my business, I built it myself.

I have seen some hard times, business failure and I paid back every single dime I owed, lived in a 8 x 24 ft unheated trailer for $150 a month because I was so broke…more than once.

I want every American to have the same opportunity I had, but you got to make it, you cannot depend on daddy or bammy to do it for your and there is no reason why you cannot do well no matter your background, race, sex, no one should stand in your way, but plenty do and they do so whether your are black or white. That glass ceiling applies to whitey just like blacky or a woman or most of us. As for you Libs if you think bammy would pizz in yo mouth if your guts were on fire you need open a window and let the crack pipe smoke clear so you can get right in the head. While you are at it you might ask yourself just how this incompetent SOB rode thru college, who picked up the tab, how did he get in the door, affirmative action, bet $ on it! Been watching that comic act of his for 4 years and were it not for slip ons he would trip on his own shoe laces. Yea folk, affirmative action along with the white guilt vote gave us the POTUS…I bet I can take a 3rd world bus boy out of a Mickey D’s and he can make better decisions.

I would bet $$ there is not a man or woman on this forum that does not have a better resume than bammy. But he is RICH as in a 1%er and you are not, he is King and you are not, so you tell me, do we promote BECAUSE of skin color, we did!

And the CRAP about gay marriage…why the hell do you want the FEDS managing and controlling marriage, WTH OVER? What do you need to suck the govt teat so bad they have to approve of your marriage…ohhhh how cute, I guess that is STYLISH! Well this ole Cowboy don’t need the govt to approve my marriage, sorry if you do, sounds like a personal problem to me.

But you will get it and guess what Libs-whitey’s you are standing at the back of the line like the conservatives are, you see you got congress to pass all your demands and now every minority in the US is entitled to rights and privileges that YOU CANNOT HAVE EVER HAVE white boy LOL you brought in on yourself as stand in the welfare line of your own making, me I don’t have to worry, I saw this coming since the 60’s and prepared for it, but you didn’t.

I would be surprised if I live long enough to ever see another Republican POTUS, in fact not sure there will be one in most of your lifetimes.

For further reading:

Rise of Hitler

USSR the Failure

Fable: Goose that laid the Golden Egg, or the story of how Americas libs killed the greatest country and economic engine the world has ever known…


#66

I’m pretty sure that quotas are only ever present in public-sector jobs – if they are present. And if not, so what? The private and public sectors have had four decades to represent black workers proportionately and fairly and they’ve failed, so somebody had to step in.

A field where some affirmative action is really needed is the IT field, where virtually the entire field is male and white. Considering that 12% of Americans are black, a larger percentage are latino, and half of us are women, that’s unacceptable.

I’m talking about private property. Businesses are private property regardless of whether you or anyone else believes there is a right to access the private property. Just because a citizen enters private property where many other citizens do business does not make it public property. What exactly is the difference between my house and my business? What dilutes my authority over my own property when it’s a business? I’m a photographer who does business with other individuals. Does my camera belong to you? Can you reasonably tell me what to do with it without violating my rights? What’s the difference between that and my building?

No, if you have a place of business that is not necessarily open to the public, I don’t believe it has to be handicapped accessible. Same with your house. The distinction between your home and a Wal-Mart is that theoretically nobody goes to your house except yourself, your family, and people you invite. It’s entirely a private matter. However, a Wal-Mart is accessed and used by the public, no matter how private the property itself is. Every new Wal-Mart must be built to adhere to government-established safety standards. It’s been that way since the early 20th century, because after disasters like the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire, the need to standardize for safety’s sake was realized. Now every public building is built to code, and we’re better off overall because of it. Again, public safety trumps rights in this situation.

It’s really no different with ADA compliance (as I’m pretty sure they’re rolled into the same standards). Your right to keep handicapped people out of your Wal-Mart is less important than the thousands of handicapped people who need to access that Wal-Mart.

That a law or government-set safety standard dictates what they build does not justify it morally at all. There is a moral argument. The utilitarian justification you suggest is lacking. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one or the few. It’s a horrible approach to deciding what’s right and wrong. The government says so, therefore it’s right is also a horrible argument.

Why?

A right to education. A right to housing. A right to food. A right to healthcare. You may not use them. If they are provided at your expense against your will, you lose something. But I don’t recognize “positive” rights as rights – and it is impossible for anyone to have more actual “rights” than anyone else. It is possible through bad reasoning (utilitarian or just because we care or whatever) to suggest that some folks ought to have more stuff at the expense of others. It happens all the time. That’s one of the main things our government does, and in the process it violates the rights of other men.

Right now, virtually every student who gets out of high school to attend college can file a FAFSA for financial aid. From there they can get government assistance whether they’re white, black, male, female, gay, straight, etc. There are also other scholarships that are issued by private organizations, such as those tailored to black students, those tailored to women, and even those tailored to tall people (it exists. Look it up!). No matter who you are, you can get virtually any scholarship so long as you have performed satisfactorily in high school and continue to do so throughout college. That being said, the NAACP offering black students a scholarship does not deplete your ability to obtain a scholarship as a white student.

As for “housing”, I’m not exactly sure what you mean by that. Many people of color live in state-funded projects, which are absolutely horrible but lightyears better than being homeless. Some get housing grants. People of color are not the only ones who can get these – you can too, if you live below a certain income level – and if you really are dying to live in the projects.

As for food, again, we’ve got TONS of food in our country. You don’t have to be any particular race to qualify for EBT or other benefits. Again, you have to qualify for it based on your income. People buying things on EBT doesn’t necessarily deplete the food that’s available to you.

Healthcare is another issue that is more reliant on income, age, etc. than race itself.

and as for your rights being “violated” by funding all of these things, please point to me the exact clause in your state or federal constitution that allows you to be the person who decides precisely where your tax dollars go. The government has the right to tax you at whatever rate they damn please, so long as you are fairly represented. If part of that taxation involves programs to help the needy, that’s their business. None of your rights are being violated.


#67

If we as individuals are trusted with the power to accept people by race, sex, etc. with no legal basis to back it up, that puts the power of treating minorities with respect in the hands of individuals – or in other words – the majority. This is really, really bad, and it has never worked. Ever. Not once. Seriously, I dare you to find me an example of this ever working.

And actually, the entire idea of “colorblindness” is garbage. That teaches people that the way to deal with different people is to just ignore their differences. The proper way to approach it is to acknowledge that people have differences, but to still treat them fairly. That seems nitpicky, but it’s an important distinction.


#68

I leave you to others. Too busy to address your collectivist, anti-rights and racist arguments. I think you probably don’t even share with me the notion that we own ourselves. There’s too much ground to cover and it doesn’t rest in how we concern ourselves with skin. You’ve got the last word with me, but that’s what I think of it.


#69

Why would we feel guilty? Why is it ok if a minority can be proud of their heritage, but we cannot?

It’s the same logic that says those who are hardworking and successful should be ashamed of their success.


#70

I killed a turkey today for Thanksgiving…good grief, you should have seen the crap come outs its butt when I but its head off. They turkey had been corned up for a week and I guess he knew why, he was gonna be dinner. Well he must not have taken a crap that whole week and when I chopped off that head he sprayed like a fire hose full of crap…kinda like your statements…

  1. Chew on this:
    “In 2010, the percentage of minority federal workers grew 5 percent in 2010 to 647,588 employees, an increase of about 31,100 workers from the previous year. Minorities represent 33.8 percent of the federal workforce; just under 18 percent are black, 8 percent are Hispanic, 5.6 percent Asian/Pacific Islander, 1.8 percent American Indian/Alaska Native and less than 1 percent are classified as “Non-Hispanic/Multiracial.””

Percentage of minority federal workers up slightly - The Federal Eye - The Washington Post

“Black enlisted Soldiers are more highly represented
in today’s Army (23%) than they are in the comparable U.S. population (i.e., Black population
of 18-39 year olds with high school diplomas (16%)). However, it should be noted
that from FY85 to FY05, the disproportionally high representation of Blacks in the Army
decreased from 27% to the current overall representation of 22%, with most of the decline being in the enlisted ranks.”

http://www.armyg1.army.mil/hr/docs/demographics/ChangingProfileFinalCopy.pdf

  1. IT Field: Mostly white, YEP!!! SURE IS! As an IT professional who spent 25+ years in the field minorities and women are rare unless its Indians (India) and Asians. WHY? Well based your your twisted thinking there is some conspiracy at all the schools in the US to keep out everybody in IT classes except WHITEY…which sounds like crack pipe talk to me. Classes are OPEN to ANYONE, not only that the IT field has far more NON DEGREED workers that other high professional fields. You can sign up for courses from private schools across the US, take the courses and then take the Certification exams…YOU pay your money, study, pass course, take exam and go to work.

I started at the very bottom as a Junior Systems Analyst Programmer and worked hard and long to become a Chief Technical Officer/VP IT. My wife has enough IT Certs that the reach from ceiling to floor almost twice, I hired her as my Director of Software Engineering. (No did not even know here and she and I did not get together until I had left and later the company was sold).

Affirmative Action got us the POTUS…you know…Bammy! AA does nothing for society or individuals other than put people who lack skills, talent and or educations into positions that are so far above them they drown in their own incompetence, kinda like Bammy is!

As someone who was in the hiring cycle early on in my career I NEVER at any time considered anything other than your knowledge, skills and abilities and my impression of how you will fit into my team. Nothing else mattered to me, I was and am a results driven!

Wanna get cut early on?

You worked at MS as an engineer…you did not even make the interview stage

When you were contacted for the interview you were told, when, where, time and what NOT to wear…show up in a suit, tie and white shirt…BONK wrong and you do not get to move on to the lighting round

Your degree was in Computer science and your minor was NOT in Business (your chances of hire improved if you had a BBA and MINOR in CS)

So the reality is that Affirmative Action will FIX NOTHING! In fact AA is based upon the old USSR Soviet model where you were tested and the results of the test what your major, YOU HAD NOT OTHER CHOICE. Of course you could tell them you did not want to be a _____________ then you were dropped from school and became a low level worker.

Now to got back to the turkey I killed this am, like him, you are full of crap!


#71

I don’t think the presence of white privilege in America automatically means white guilt must exist as compensation. It’s a cultural phenomenon, not an active strategy by any organization of authority or any particular individuals. The white man was no more in control of his starting point than any other man, so why should he feel bad for starting off better than some? I certainly don’t feel bad for being born and raised in a relativity stable and middle class lifestyle - which certainly gives me a leg up over individuals who were born and raised into poorer, less stable families.

It seems to me that a lot of people are quick to deny white privilege, (regardless of the facts presented) because they assume that white guilt is tied with recognizing it as real. It’s not racist to accept realities about our culture. It’s not your fault if you were just given an unfair advantage by circumstances outside of your control. It is; however, short-sighted to deny that said unfair advantage does exist - regardless of the reasons why. It’s not like I’m accusing you of cheating or anything.


#72

And it’s all thanks to the free and unregulated market, right? ;3


#73

A field where some affirmative action is really needed is the IT field, where virtually the entire field is male and white. Considering that 12% of Americans are black, a larger percentage are latino, and half of us are women, that’s unacceptable.

You are so remote from reality it’s sad! IT departments and electronics companies generally seek one thing: people who are able and willing do the work! They don’t care whether those skilled individuals are white, black or pea green! So, as weird as it may seem to you, people who don’t learn the necessary skills - who choose other fields of study - aren’t going to get hired in IT and electronics. IF minorities are “under-represented” in IT and electronics - I don’t see such an under-representation, but what do I know … I’ve only worked at computer and electronic companies for over 35 years - it’s because they choose to get an education suited to fields other than IT and electronics.

Maybe it’s weird to you, but IT departments and electronics companies are not in business to employ in an exact proportional representation of various ethnic groups. Their business is to employ people for the purpose of producing goods and services, the ethnicity or sex of employees being irrelevant.

I will add that the companies I’ve worked at over the past 3 1/2 decades have literally never been all-non-Hispanic-“white”; several companies have been majority non-“white”; others were plurality non-Hispanic-“white”. So either I’ve managed to find -accidentally - the weirdest companies in all of Silicon Valley, or the factoids underlying your complaint are not fact. I will say that the majority - not all - of “minorities” I’ve worked around have been east and south Asians and Pacific Islanders - but I don’t mentally segregate non-“whites” into politically correct and politically incorrect sub-categories; if certain minority groups find what I’ve observed somehow objectionable, that’s their problem, not the problem of the companies at which I’ve worked! IMO, if race-baiters and -whiners invested a tenth of the energy they put into their victimology and whinings into educating themselves and others and working at their chosen careers they’d find the real-life workplace vastly different from their paranoid imaginings! But an education for a productive career is work! And working to be excellent in a productive career is hard work!


#74

Horse Manure. I come from a white middle class family. I was privileged enough to grow up without a Dad. At the age of 18, I was sent to prison on my first, non violent offense. Once released, I was privileged enough to be homeless for 2 years. I picked myself up and started college. I was privileged enough to have to quit, to support my family. I was privileged enough to be shot in the back, while doing my job. I was privileged enough to have my job taken, for Affirmative action. I also had trouble getting a job, since minorities were favored. I started my own business, and even the IRS got involved and took everything I owned.
Do I blame minorities for my plight? No, but I also realize that White Privilege is an illusion, perpetuated by White Guilters and minorities. I blame ME for my troubles. The decisions I made were based on expedience, selfishness and laziness. In this country, race brings privilege, not persecution. Ask a Black guy, when was the last time he lost a job to a white guy with less experience/knowledge. White privilege…what a crock.


#75

No, it does explain why our bureaucrats are so horrible compared to European countries like Germany.