|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On July 26 2019 14:14 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2019 14:02 Mohdoo wrote:On July 26 2019 13:13 Falling wrote: I personally like Lindsey Graham's solution, although it looks like Democrats are blocking the ability to vote on it for now.
The main thing I like is that you need to apply from Mexico or a home country, not the US. The big problem it seems is that the facilities are simply not adequate to the volume of people trying to get through. This breaks the system because they simply cannot process in time, which forces officials to release families after 20 days. In a perverse way, this creates the unintended consequences of simply getting to the border with a child, any child and try to force the system to release you, plus it creates a giant market for bad actors in the human smuggling business.
So requiring to apply from outside the US, you immediately get rid of the ticking time bomb of the terrible holding conditions and you don't need to waste money expanding holding facilities. And then you cut out the market for human smugglers that might just abandon their 'cargo' to suffocate or die of dehydration because they can't pay enough.
As a result, Graham wants to add 500 new immigration judges which would expedite the waiting lines and then he's willing to negotiate on sending aid to South American countries as a bone for Democrats/ maybe helping with some of the economics push factors that generates the desire to emigrate out.
Seems like a good idea to me. It shouldn't just be our local continents helping. If we have a humanitarian refugee crisis, we should be asking other big countries to help. Maybe I'm missing something, but once you transport an immigrant somewhere, isn't it the same as being in the US? If we sent like 5k people to each of like 30 countries, it would help a lot. Totally worth the price of transportation. My preference is the US handles it because we have available wealth. But if we're not, it's not like it's required to be physically connected. The US has a pretty low asylum cap for its population and wealth. It'd be wrong to think that other countries aren't doing their fair share. The US is doing very little, and somehow still failing at it.
If you see a really buff dude laughing at someone stuck under a tree, you should still try your best to help the person under the tree. When the buff guy is laughing and clearly totally uninterested in helping, you should do your best, even if you aren't buff. I am not saying it isn't the US' responsibility. It is. But there are many instances where the responsible party is not the one to solve a problem. Trump's cabinet + McConnell's senate means we're gonna keep starving children.
You could argue the US is creating refugees from refugees/immigrants. These are people who are being submitted to unreasonable suffering and starvation on a wide scale with no hope of things getting better. That is a situation where Europe or other major countries should be reaching out to help. The sad reality is that people in the US need to be rescued. I would love for the US to solve this problem ourselves, but if you were to estimate the chances of Trump treating these people humanely, what % what you come up with?
What I am suggesting is: How about Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Turkey, Norway, Finland each take 3-5k of these people in cages?
******NOT BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE US' RESPONSIBILITY******
*******BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED HELP********
|
On July 27 2019 01:02 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2019 14:14 KwarK wrote:On July 26 2019 14:02 Mohdoo wrote:On July 26 2019 13:13 Falling wrote: I personally like Lindsey Graham's solution, although it looks like Democrats are blocking the ability to vote on it for now.
The main thing I like is that you need to apply from Mexico or a home country, not the US. The big problem it seems is that the facilities are simply not adequate to the volume of people trying to get through. This breaks the system because they simply cannot process in time, which forces officials to release families after 20 days. In a perverse way, this creates the unintended consequences of simply getting to the border with a child, any child and try to force the system to release you, plus it creates a giant market for bad actors in the human smuggling business.
So requiring to apply from outside the US, you immediately get rid of the ticking time bomb of the terrible holding conditions and you don't need to waste money expanding holding facilities. And then you cut out the market for human smugglers that might just abandon their 'cargo' to suffocate or die of dehydration because they can't pay enough.
As a result, Graham wants to add 500 new immigration judges which would expedite the waiting lines and then he's willing to negotiate on sending aid to South American countries as a bone for Democrats/ maybe helping with some of the economics push factors that generates the desire to emigrate out.
Seems like a good idea to me. It shouldn't just be our local continents helping. If we have a humanitarian refugee crisis, we should be asking other big countries to help. Maybe I'm missing something, but once you transport an immigrant somewhere, isn't it the same as being in the US? If we sent like 5k people to each of like 30 countries, it would help a lot. Totally worth the price of transportation. My preference is the US handles it because we have available wealth. But if we're not, it's not like it's required to be physically connected. The US has a pretty low asylum cap for its population and wealth. It'd be wrong to think that other countries aren't doing their fair share. The US is doing very little, and somehow still failing at it. If you see a really buff dude laughing at someone stuck under a tree, you should still try your best to help the person under the tree. When the buff guy is laughing and clearly totally uninterested in helping, you should do your best, even if you aren't buff. I am not saying it isn't the US' responsibility. It is. But there are many instances where the responsible party is not the one to solve a problem. Trump's cabinet + McConnell's senate means we're gonna keep starving children. You could argue the US is creating refugees from refugees/immigrants. These are people who are being submitted to unreasonable suffering and starvation on a wide scale with no hope of things getting better. That is a situation where Europe or other major countries should be reaching out to help. The sad reality is that people in the US need to be rescued. I would love for the US to solve this problem ourselves, but if you were to estimate the chances of Trump treating these people humanely, what % what you come up with? What I am suggesting is: How about Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Turkey, Norway, Finland each take 3-5k of these people in cages? ******NOT BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE US' RESPONSIBILITY****** *******BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED HELP********
tbh, imo, because like Democrats to Republicans, their moral superiority is largely based on comparing themselves to us and we set a pretty low bar.
EDIT: (I read "how about" as "why don't") if my wording is confusing anyone.
|
What I am suggesting is: How about Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Turkey, Norway, Finland each take 3-5k of these people in cages?
******NOT BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE US' RESPONSIBILITY******
*******BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED HELP********
Eh... how to send immigrants between countries is a very delicate and controversial topic. There has been a lot of controversy and arguments in Europe about this with Greece and Italy complaining the most. There are litterally millions of people in refugee camps in countries like Lebanon, Syria and Turkey I believe the US wants nothing to do with, but no children in cages afaik.
Your ****s does not make your silly statement make any more sense.
|
On July 26 2019 23:16 Dromar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2019 22:10 GreenHorizons wrote: Since corporate media is blasting us with another wave of "Russia runs our elections" it dawned on me the trolliest thing they could do is blatantly campaign for Democrats to win
They could still campaign for Trump too and make it a wash issue that neither side can discuss. Knowing our politicians they'd probably just argue about who they are helping more though. I still maintain that Russia WILL do this. All they have to do is change one vote and be "sloppy" enough that we find out that it happened (ideally Russia doesn't actually get caught as the ones doing it, just that it is found out that people's votes were changed). The shitstorm would be unstoppable. Trump would declare the election invalid if the vote were changed from R to D and cause an actual, for real constitutional crisis. If the vote were changed from D to R he would say it's Russia Hoax part 2 but there would be concrete proof that would fuel the narrative the left has been telling for 3 years. Why would they not do this? They've got the best opportunity ever with Trump and the current division in the country, we have essentially no way of stopping it, and it's not even that expensive or difficult. Missed this at first. Yup. And Democrats would be helpless to fight it because of the "Russia Hoax" they pushed.
Hell they could make it a twofer (voter ID) and burn a low-lying US asset by doing it in person.
1 switched/illegal Russian vote for Democrats is all it will take for people to imagine it could have been millions more. So the outcome is just another political fight rather than decisive.
|
On July 26 2019 22:48 Ryzel wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2019 22:34 farvacola wrote: And as Jock’s follow up implies, the fundamentals here are not actually as important as the practical realities facing a country as continually attractive to immigrants as the US. The issue isn’t one of open borders or the essential character of a national identity, rather it is one of “can we process immigrants in a way that is both humane and a component of a legitimate legal procedure?” The answer to that is yes, and no, it doesn’t require godly fortitude or divine organizational skills. No arguments here. I’m just personally more interested in the philosophical discussion. I kinda’ assumed it was a given that the whole process could be done more effectively and humanely from a policy standpoint, but unless we’re discussing the merits of actual policy decisions being mulled over in Congress, it’s just not a discussion I’m interested in.
You might want to look at Susan Wolf’s theory of “moral saints.” They are (ideal moral) people who essentially always act to help and care for others, even at their own expense. Most people, if they gave it some thought, would not want to live in a society where everyone was a moral saint. In other words, there are other non-moral considerations that we also value. We are pluralistic in our values.
You might also consider a different moral framework. Many moral frameworks are essentially universalist frameworks constructed from a foundation that relies on abstract principles. Think of Kant’s rational moral order. Almost all situations worth considering, however, involve principles that are in conflict. Rather than trying to work out consistent principles (that will never be fully worked out), another approach might be to consider morality as rooted in individual, irrational, moral impulses. The impulse, the call of conscience, comes from one’s face to face encounter with the other, and relies on the irrational, unarticulable demand by the other, rather than a Law-like universal principle. This way of looking at morality, however, makes people uneasy, because there is no way to enforce ethical principles (i.e. social norms and rules — ethical as opposed to moral within this framework’s idiom). But the major advantage is that rather than conceiving of society as founded on and made possible by laws and ethical norms (think Locke and Hobbes), it is the individuals “being for” another in society that makes possible the establishment of Law. Law then is more a guiding framework than any absolute obligation which takes precedence over the moral impulse.
|
On July 26 2019 08:11 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2019 03:46 ShambhalaWar wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2019 07:20 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 06:29 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 05:32 IgnE wrote:On July 19 2019 04:02 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 02:35 IgnE wrote:On July 19 2019 01:45 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 00:05 IgnE wrote:On July 18 2019 15:29 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 18 2019 13:46 IgnE wrote:On July 18 2019 13:20 ShambhalaWar wrote: [quote]
I would say the first step, and probably the most important is simply acknowledging that I have privilege, and giving up my ignorance about my privilege.
The nature of privilege is ignorance, the privileged people don't have to consider the problems other people do. So in regard to racial privilege, in acknowledging it I would think there comes some degree of commitment in calling it out when I see rather than just letting it slide because, "I'm white and it doesn't affect me."
If I'm playing a game a CSGO and I hear the N word (happens all the time), rather than just be ok with that, I can at the very least confront them on it, and report the account. There are many different versions of that... for example is I see a nazi symbol written on a wall, I can get a pen and mark over it.
Donate to a charity organization that combats racial inequality, march for black lives matter. I haven't done these latter two things, but for a lot of my black friends growing up I apologized for not believe them when we were kids, and tell them I believe them now.
Small steps, but if all privileged people did that, the world would change. I thought there was more to privilege than that. You don't sound like someone who's given much of any thought to the subject. What's the point of your post? Are you actually curious about my experience or just want something to rail against? The post GH made that I quoted, you sound exactly like the type of person that post describes. Equality feels like oppression for you, that true for you or you just never even gave it a thought? No, I'm actually just surprised at how little privilege you actually had to relinquish. It's almost like you didn't have much power in the first place. You really stretched there, too, with the suggestion to donate to BLM. Giving away money counts as giving away power I guess. But maybe the metaphorical language doesn't really work? Why do you think this idea that giving up privilege feels like oppression resonates with you so much when your examples of giving up privilege are so lame? I can think of something else that might better describe the experience of 1) conversion to a cause, 2) spreading the good news to blasphemers, and 3) tithing — but "relinquishing power" isn't it. I'll ask again... What is the point of your post? Does Equality feel like oppression for you? And if you don't think money is power, you are incredibly naive. I am trying to decide why this “relinquish (white) power” articulation seems so off to me. Who are the kind of people you imagine when you imagine indignant whites for whom giving up privilege feels like oppression? Are they people who can actually give up “power”? What kind of power do they have and don’t have, now, in 2019? And what kind of power do you gain as a “woke” white who can preach to others? I feel obliged to point out that 1) I acknowledged that giving money might be some kind of “relinquishing power” although such language feels overwrought — I’m not sure why that would be different in kind from other charitable giving or why it would feel oppressive and 2) you said you haven’t actually given money to BLM so it seems fairly moot. As for my personal opinion, no, equality doesn’t feel like oppression to me, hence my line of questioning. Personally, I am inclined more towards the idea of “recognition.” edit: given that someone posted a Nazi talking about “race-recognition” while I was typing this post, I have to now clarify that I meant “recognition” in the sense of Hegel or Levinas: recognition of the subject. Not some scientistic recognition of race, which we want to deconstruct anyway right? You speak like someone who really doesn't understand the concept of privilege, which is really the nature of it privilege... you don't have to worry about it because it doesn't directly affect you. If you are are white, there are a host of difficulties in life you don't have to worry about... In other words, day to day, you don't have to give these difficulties a second of thought, but minorities do, because they are affected by the difficulties. For example, as a white person, when you are pulled over by the police in America, you don't have to worry about being killed in the same way an African-American does. When you get pulled over you expect to pay a speeding ticket. When an African-American gets pulled over they have to worry they might die. The privileged person doesn't have to give a seconds thought to the latter problem, that is their privilege... To walk through life worrying about other things and thinking about things other than being killed by a cop. Let's use your word... recognition. If you "recognize" your privilege, that is the first step, Yay! After you recognize it, you can do other things to be allies for minority groups, and there are varying degrees of time and effort you can put toward that. But... by virtue of "recognizing" your privilege, you are in a sense giving up some degree of your power, because you can no longer just pretend minority groups aren't being persecuted. And it's also not enough to simply now "recognize" your privilege, you have to speak out against it... or be the person who knows and does nothing. No, I understand all that quite well. What am I trying to get at here is what you meant by “relinquishing power” and the particular resonance of “when you’ve been privileged, equality feels like oppression.” Don’t you find it curious that “privilege” is usually described via its lack? People of color lack certain presumptions of innocence, people of color lack certain presumptions of competence, people of color lack safety in their dealings with police. So what are we really talking about here? Giving up those presumptions? Giving up the privilege of ignoring people? If the “power” you give up is the power to “pretend” or the power not to sympathize it seems like a rather weak form of power. If that’s all it is, it’s not exactly clear how it’s related to some white people’s complaints that they aren’t particularly privileged. You might not even begrudge some redneck in West Virginia his complaints that he also lacks such presumptions (of competence, etc.), that he might even face worse presumptions, in 2019, than an upper class person of color dressed in a well-tailored suit who gets paid a bunch of money. Ah well, fuck the rednecks. If you dress like that, and wear a rat-tail, and drive a truck, and listen to country music you probably are ignorant and incompetent anyway. So you could make the same statement about a "red-neck" and competence (this is your example), technically that would be true... and would be the argument of reverse racism. It's essentially a standpoint of some white people, that they are too the victim in this. I'm not sure if that's the point you are trying to make, but you are dancing on that edge of people interpreting you that way. The problem with that is while in some sense maybe it is true, you are focusing on the most privileged group and the ways in which the might not have privilege... Therefore ignoring essentially 90% (or more) of the issue of privilege. No it’s not reverse racism. I’m not talking about a person’s of color presumptions about rednecks or even about race at all. Their being unprivileged need not be connected to race at all. I have absolutely no idea where you pulled that “90%” number from or why you think including white redneck West Virginians in a group that is “most privileged” is an especially astute or helpful way of grouping people. The whole point of this exercise has been to point out that if you think the children of two doctors of color in 2019 who live in a major city are unambiguously less “privileged” than some white children born in West Virginia to parents who didn’t complete high school and are living in a trailer, your concept of privilege is inadequate. (To heighten the point, consider black sons of NBA players, who are vastly vastly more likely than anyone else on the planet to play in the NBA). You haven’t mentioned “intersectionality” yet, but maybe you should pick it up. Show nested quote +And for the record I still don't think you get it, but I encourage you to try a bit more to consider yourself and how much easier your life is day to day, because when you walk into a grocery store people aren't eyeing you the whole time to see if you are going to steal something. For the record, even if I thought you were a moron I wouldn’t let that opinion distract me from engaging with what you’ve actually said, and I don’t see why you should attempt to let your assumptions about me carry the argument for you either. In any case, let’s say I had never ever considered before how my experience shopping might be different than that of a person of color. Now I’ve had the epiphany: Wow! They get followed by security some times! Ok. Now what power do I have to give up to rectify that situation (even if I’m the security guard?!?)? Show nested quote +By virtue of being born white in the US you have an exponentially disproportionate lower risk of being incarcerated in your life time than and African American person. * That alone is massive privilege. If you get stuck in that system of incarceration it will chew you up and spit you out broken. Imagine if I told you today, as of today you are 5 times more likely to be locked up than prior in your life, and you knew this to be true for a fact. Do you think that would increase your daily stress? How would you feel the next time you get pulled over for speeding? How would your relationship to police officers change (would you still see them has here to help you)? How would your life change if you actually got locked up (maybe you lost your privilege to have your vote counted)? Maybe you got killed in prison... https://www.motherjones.com/crime-justice/2018/02/the-race-gap-in-u-s-prisons-is-glaring-and-poverty-is-making-it-worse/This is just one example of the many you don't have to worry about because you are white, are you going to tell me that is a weak effect? Yeah I know all that. I don’t see what privileges I have to give up in order for this not to happen, or how anything you’ve talked about relating to your awokening bears on this beyond the fact that you are no longer ignorant of it. This also raises issues of boundary-drawing which your own source points out. How do we disentangle blackness from poverty or from even more difficult to capture factors like community cohesion, family structures, attitudes, etc.? Show nested quote +If you were born black back in the days of slavery you had a 100% chance of ending up a slave. How do you think that would have affected your life?
A weak affect? I’ve been very careful to say “in 2019” repeatedly. I wasn’t born in the days of slavery and neither were you. To your first point, privilege is directly tied to race... you cannot separate the two, this is true world wide. Race has been shown throughout human history to carry favor in regard to cultural classes. And historically/generally, people with darker skin are persecuted simply for that fact. I don't think that statement is up for debate. "Bleaching skin" to a lighter color is a cultural phenomenon in India because there simply a skin color bias. People actually attempt to stain their skin to a lighter color so they are less dark skinned. http://theconversation.com/bleached-girls-india-and-its-love-for-light-skin-80655In India, it doesn't matter if you are poor or rich, if you have lighter skin you are likely to be favored by society. The same is true in America... If you are a white redneck in West Virginia, you are going to be favored in society based simply on the fact you have white skin. That doesn't mean you won't be treated poorly based on other characteristics, such as the perception/stereotype of how people might negatively view being a "redneck," but you will for sure carry advantage in American culture for being white. That statement is also not up for debate imo. There is a huge body of research that supports it, studies in police violence, poverty, discrimination in housing, white people getting more favorable sentences in the justice system... this list goes on. In your example of a doctor with 2 black kids, you are looking very myopically at the fact their father was a doctor or an NBA player. Below is a recent example (there are more if you just research it) of an NBA player who was tazered by police for no good reason. If you consider an NBA player part of a privileged class of society (because of money), then it is a striking thing to note that he gets tazered... the conclusion many people draw is that it is because he was black. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/23/613657447/milwaukee-police-disciplined-for-tasing-arrest-of-nba-playerBelow is a black senator who states he was pulled over 6-7 times in one year, I (not a senator, or rich, but white) have been pulled over maybe 1 time in the last 4-5 years (maybe more). https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/13/politics/tim-scott-police-racial-profiling/index.htmlMy point is that despite position in class or society, African Americans face discrimination that white people don't... that occurs despite financial status. You can bet that if you are poor and African American it will happen wayyyyyy more, that if you are rich and African American. But please take your time, and find me any example in the last decade of a white NBA player who was tasered for no good reason by a cop. I just did a google search, "white man harassed by cop." Every example on the page that turned up was of a black man being harassed by police or someone harassing police. You did a great job of saying the word, "intersectionality" but don't describe at all how it contributes to your comments. Intersectionality is important, it means to not have a myopic view in considering discrimination and abuse of power. For example, not just being black in America, but also poor and how the two dynamics interact together. Or being white and poor, there you have a mix of privilege (being white), and lack of privilege (being poor). In your early statements you seem unable to consider both of these things being able to exist in the same space, in your comments about redneck people. It's as if you think, how can they be white poor and privileged... as if being poor negates any form of privilege from being white... That is exactly what intersectionality address imo... That both things can and do occur in the same space... you can be privilege in some ways and not privileged in others. I'm not making my comments as a judgement toward you, I make them because you speak like someone who in my subjective opinion doesn't understand the dynamics of privilege... as a white person I try to make an effort to help other white Americans understand what their privilege is and how it affects others, and how we can consciously work with our privilege to balance the imbalance it creates in society. I am far from the person with the most understanding or expertise in this area (many more know much more than me), but I know something and I'm trying to do something about it, rather than ignore it (even if it is just talking to you in a forum). You weren't born in a time of overt slavery, and you didn't enslave anyone... but you absolutely were born in a culture that at one point it time was ubiquitous with the practice of slavery, and because of being born white you benefitted from the cultural imbalance that was created (and was never fully corrected) from the practice of slavery so many years ago. The only reason you don't know that, is because people know what affects them. If you had dark skin, the bias of our culture would affect you daily, you would feel it... and be unable to ignore how shitty it made you feel. You would be likely feel depressed, tense, and probably have less social motility as a result. As a white person you don't even have to consider it... You don't have to spend your time doing ANYTHING about it... you just get to live your life as normal, that is privilege. African Americans don't get to do that. Their daily list of things to do includes a list of things you don't have to worry about, such as "teach my son how to talk to police in a way that doesn't get him shot." That is a conversation you would never have with your kids because it sounds insane to say to them, but for other races of American citizens it is a very sane and potentially necessary conversation to have. As far as disentangling poverty from color of skin or race, I think that is a phonemically good question. In my opinion, it's the result of decades old damage done by slavery. Look at the Native American culture and African American culture, two cultures extremely harmed by white culture... both were left in poverty, white culture basically hamstrung them by essentially murdering and enslaving them all. Slaves have nothing, you set them free, they now have freedom... but still no money or home. How do you think that affects someone's social mobility? It destroys it. How many generations do you think it takes for a culture of people that were enslaved to get to a place of equal footing with the people that enslaved them? Our racism continued past slavery, we are not too far from 200 years since the end of overt slavery and many of the dynamics are still at play, and the imbalance is certainly there. The concept of "reparations" was born out of this very problem... which is the idea of giving up your privilege/power (in the case of reparations is money) so that underprivileged groups can have equal footing in society. It's as if white people said lets run a race, then as the race starts shot the African American runner in the leg and then pretended that never happened. Then the whole race we are like, "you just aren't trying hard enough man... you got to run faster if you ever want to make it to the finish line." First step in rectifying that situation... is to own that "you" or your culture/ancestors actually shot the other runner, and that the race isn't fair... to make if fair you don't need to shoot yourself per se (which is what I think most white people fear), but you need to do something drastic. At the very least, stop the race, nurture the shot runner, feed them for months until the wounds heal, then help them to get physical therapy and strength training... Then reschedule the race and run again if they feel fit and equal. That's what you give up, the privilege of ignoring the problem... you have to actually exert yourself to correct the fuck up of your ancestors... you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it, so that it somehow gets fixed. It is the responsibility of all white people to attend to the fuck ups of our ancestors. quite simply, you are projecting your last paragraph is totally devoid of content. it amounts to talking about talking about something: “you have to actually exert yourself [...] you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it.” well, mission accomplished then. we’ve done that.
If that's all you took from that post, I gave you wayyyyyy more credit than you deserve as someone who I thought wanted to have a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture.
"You're projecting" is just a cop out, I've made many valid points, none of which you are addressing.
My guess is you don't have any answers, but that it's so much easier to just ignore the whole thing... Which really does reenforce what I'm saying.
|
On July 27 2019 02:15 ShambhalaWar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2019 08:11 IgnE wrote:On July 26 2019 03:46 ShambhalaWar wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2019 07:20 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 06:29 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 05:32 IgnE wrote:On July 19 2019 04:02 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 02:35 IgnE wrote:On July 19 2019 01:45 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 00:05 IgnE wrote:On July 18 2019 15:29 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 18 2019 13:46 IgnE wrote:On July 18 2019 13:20 ShambhalaWar wrote: [quote]
I would say the first step, and probably the most important is simply acknowledging that I have privilege, and giving up my ignorance about my privilege.
The nature of privilege is ignorance, the privileged people don't have to consider the problems other people do. So in regard to racial privilege, in acknowledging it I would think there comes some degree of commitment in calling it out when I see rather than just letting it slide because, "I'm white and it doesn't affect me."
If I'm playing a game a CSGO and I hear the N word (happens all the time), rather than just be ok with that, I can at the very least confront them on it, and report the account. There are many different versions of that... for example is I see a nazi symbol written on a wall, I can get a pen and mark over it.
Donate to a charity organization that combats racial inequality, march for black lives matter. I haven't done these latter two things, but for a lot of my black friends growing up I apologized for not believe them when we were kids, and tell them I believe them now.
Small steps, but if all privileged people did that, the world would change. I thought there was more to privilege than that. You don't sound like someone who's given much of any thought to the subject. What's the point of your post? Are you actually curious about my experience or just want something to rail against? The post GH made that I quoted, you sound exactly like the type of person that post describes. Equality feels like oppression for you, that true for you or you just never even gave it a thought? No, I'm actually just surprised at how little privilege you actually had to relinquish. It's almost like you didn't have much power in the first place. You really stretched there, too, with the suggestion to donate to BLM. Giving away money counts as giving away power I guess. But maybe the metaphorical language doesn't really work? Why do you think this idea that giving up privilege feels like oppression resonates with you so much when your examples of giving up privilege are so lame? I can think of something else that might better describe the experience of 1) conversion to a cause, 2) spreading the good news to blasphemers, and 3) tithing — but "relinquishing power" isn't it. I'll ask again... What is the point of your post? Does Equality feel like oppression for you? And if you don't think money is power, you are incredibly naive. I am trying to decide why this “relinquish (white) power” articulation seems so off to me. Who are the kind of people you imagine when you imagine indignant whites for whom giving up privilege feels like oppression? Are they people who can actually give up “power”? What kind of power do they have and don’t have, now, in 2019? And what kind of power do you gain as a “woke” white who can preach to others? I feel obliged to point out that 1) I acknowledged that giving money might be some kind of “relinquishing power” although such language feels overwrought — I’m not sure why that would be different in kind from other charitable giving or why it would feel oppressive and 2) you said you haven’t actually given money to BLM so it seems fairly moot. As for my personal opinion, no, equality doesn’t feel like oppression to me, hence my line of questioning. Personally, I am inclined more towards the idea of “recognition.” edit: given that someone posted a Nazi talking about “race-recognition” while I was typing this post, I have to now clarify that I meant “recognition” in the sense of Hegel or Levinas: recognition of the subject. Not some scientistic recognition of race, which we want to deconstruct anyway right? You speak like someone who really doesn't understand the concept of privilege, which is really the nature of it privilege... you don't have to worry about it because it doesn't directly affect you. If you are are white, there are a host of difficulties in life you don't have to worry about... In other words, day to day, you don't have to give these difficulties a second of thought, but minorities do, because they are affected by the difficulties. For example, as a white person, when you are pulled over by the police in America, you don't have to worry about being killed in the same way an African-American does. When you get pulled over you expect to pay a speeding ticket. When an African-American gets pulled over they have to worry they might die. The privileged person doesn't have to give a seconds thought to the latter problem, that is their privilege... To walk through life worrying about other things and thinking about things other than being killed by a cop. Let's use your word... recognition. If you "recognize" your privilege, that is the first step, Yay! After you recognize it, you can do other things to be allies for minority groups, and there are varying degrees of time and effort you can put toward that. But... by virtue of "recognizing" your privilege, you are in a sense giving up some degree of your power, because you can no longer just pretend minority groups aren't being persecuted. And it's also not enough to simply now "recognize" your privilege, you have to speak out against it... or be the person who knows and does nothing. No, I understand all that quite well. What am I trying to get at here is what you meant by “relinquishing power” and the particular resonance of “when you’ve been privileged, equality feels like oppression.” Don’t you find it curious that “privilege” is usually described via its lack? People of color lack certain presumptions of innocence, people of color lack certain presumptions of competence, people of color lack safety in their dealings with police. So what are we really talking about here? Giving up those presumptions? Giving up the privilege of ignoring people? If the “power” you give up is the power to “pretend” or the power not to sympathize it seems like a rather weak form of power. If that’s all it is, it’s not exactly clear how it’s related to some white people’s complaints that they aren’t particularly privileged. You might not even begrudge some redneck in West Virginia his complaints that he also lacks such presumptions (of competence, etc.), that he might even face worse presumptions, in 2019, than an upper class person of color dressed in a well-tailored suit who gets paid a bunch of money. Ah well, fuck the rednecks. If you dress like that, and wear a rat-tail, and drive a truck, and listen to country music you probably are ignorant and incompetent anyway. So you could make the same statement about a "red-neck" and competence (this is your example), technically that would be true... and would be the argument of reverse racism. It's essentially a standpoint of some white people, that they are too the victim in this. I'm not sure if that's the point you are trying to make, but you are dancing on that edge of people interpreting you that way. The problem with that is while in some sense maybe it is true, you are focusing on the most privileged group and the ways in which the might not have privilege... Therefore ignoring essentially 90% (or more) of the issue of privilege. No it’s not reverse racism. I’m not talking about a person’s of color presumptions about rednecks or even about race at all. Their being unprivileged need not be connected to race at all. I have absolutely no idea where you pulled that “90%” number from or why you think including white redneck West Virginians in a group that is “most privileged” is an especially astute or helpful way of grouping people. The whole point of this exercise has been to point out that if you think the children of two doctors of color in 2019 who live in a major city are unambiguously less “privileged” than some white children born in West Virginia to parents who didn’t complete high school and are living in a trailer, your concept of privilege is inadequate. (To heighten the point, consider black sons of NBA players, who are vastly vastly more likely than anyone else on the planet to play in the NBA). You haven’t mentioned “intersectionality” yet, but maybe you should pick it up. Show nested quote +And for the record I still don't think you get it, but I encourage you to try a bit more to consider yourself and how much easier your life is day to day, because when you walk into a grocery store people aren't eyeing you the whole time to see if you are going to steal something. For the record, even if I thought you were a moron I wouldn’t let that opinion distract me from engaging with what you’ve actually said, and I don’t see why you should attempt to let your assumptions about me carry the argument for you either. In any case, let’s say I had never ever considered before how my experience shopping might be different than that of a person of color. Now I’ve had the epiphany: Wow! They get followed by security some times! Ok. Now what power do I have to give up to rectify that situation (even if I’m the security guard?!?)? Show nested quote +By virtue of being born white in the US you have an exponentially disproportionate lower risk of being incarcerated in your life time than and African American person. * That alone is massive privilege. If you get stuck in that system of incarceration it will chew you up and spit you out broken. Imagine if I told you today, as of today you are 5 times more likely to be locked up than prior in your life, and you knew this to be true for a fact. Do you think that would increase your daily stress? How would you feel the next time you get pulled over for speeding? How would your relationship to police officers change (would you still see them has here to help you)? How would your life change if you actually got locked up (maybe you lost your privilege to have your vote counted)? Maybe you got killed in prison... https://www.motherjones.com/crime-justice/2018/02/the-race-gap-in-u-s-prisons-is-glaring-and-poverty-is-making-it-worse/This is just one example of the many you don't have to worry about because you are white, are you going to tell me that is a weak effect? Yeah I know all that. I don’t see what privileges I have to give up in order for this not to happen, or how anything you’ve talked about relating to your awokening bears on this beyond the fact that you are no longer ignorant of it. This also raises issues of boundary-drawing which your own source points out. How do we disentangle blackness from poverty or from even more difficult to capture factors like community cohesion, family structures, attitudes, etc.? Show nested quote +If you were born black back in the days of slavery you had a 100% chance of ending up a slave. How do you think that would have affected your life?
A weak affect? I’ve been very careful to say “in 2019” repeatedly. I wasn’t born in the days of slavery and neither were you. To your first point, privilege is directly tied to race... you cannot separate the two, this is true world wide. Race has been shown throughout human history to carry favor in regard to cultural classes. And historically/generally, people with darker skin are persecuted simply for that fact. I don't think that statement is up for debate. "Bleaching skin" to a lighter color is a cultural phenomenon in India because there simply a skin color bias. People actually attempt to stain their skin to a lighter color so they are less dark skinned. http://theconversation.com/bleached-girls-india-and-its-love-for-light-skin-80655In India, it doesn't matter if you are poor or rich, if you have lighter skin you are likely to be favored by society. The same is true in America... If you are a white redneck in West Virginia, you are going to be favored in society based simply on the fact you have white skin. That doesn't mean you won't be treated poorly based on other characteristics, such as the perception/stereotype of how people might negatively view being a "redneck," but you will for sure carry advantage in American culture for being white. That statement is also not up for debate imo. There is a huge body of research that supports it, studies in police violence, poverty, discrimination in housing, white people getting more favorable sentences in the justice system... this list goes on. In your example of a doctor with 2 black kids, you are looking very myopically at the fact their father was a doctor or an NBA player. Below is a recent example (there are more if you just research it) of an NBA player who was tazered by police for no good reason. If you consider an NBA player part of a privileged class of society (because of money), then it is a striking thing to note that he gets tazered... the conclusion many people draw is that it is because he was black. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/23/613657447/milwaukee-police-disciplined-for-tasing-arrest-of-nba-playerBelow is a black senator who states he was pulled over 6-7 times in one year, I (not a senator, or rich, but white) have been pulled over maybe 1 time in the last 4-5 years (maybe more). https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/13/politics/tim-scott-police-racial-profiling/index.htmlMy point is that despite position in class or society, African Americans face discrimination that white people don't... that occurs despite financial status. You can bet that if you are poor and African American it will happen wayyyyyy more, that if you are rich and African American. But please take your time, and find me any example in the last decade of a white NBA player who was tasered for no good reason by a cop. I just did a google search, "white man harassed by cop." Every example on the page that turned up was of a black man being harassed by police or someone harassing police. You did a great job of saying the word, "intersectionality" but don't describe at all how it contributes to your comments. Intersectionality is important, it means to not have a myopic view in considering discrimination and abuse of power. For example, not just being black in America, but also poor and how the two dynamics interact together. Or being white and poor, there you have a mix of privilege (being white), and lack of privilege (being poor). In your early statements you seem unable to consider both of these things being able to exist in the same space, in your comments about redneck people. It's as if you think, how can they be white poor and privileged... as if being poor negates any form of privilege from being white... That is exactly what intersectionality address imo... That both things can and do occur in the same space... you can be privilege in some ways and not privileged in others. I'm not making my comments as a judgement toward you, I make them because you speak like someone who in my subjective opinion doesn't understand the dynamics of privilege... as a white person I try to make an effort to help other white Americans understand what their privilege is and how it affects others, and how we can consciously work with our privilege to balance the imbalance it creates in society. I am far from the person with the most understanding or expertise in this area (many more know much more than me), but I know something and I'm trying to do something about it, rather than ignore it (even if it is just talking to you in a forum). You weren't born in a time of overt slavery, and you didn't enslave anyone... but you absolutely were born in a culture that at one point it time was ubiquitous with the practice of slavery, and because of being born white you benefitted from the cultural imbalance that was created (and was never fully corrected) from the practice of slavery so many years ago. The only reason you don't know that, is because people know what affects them. If you had dark skin, the bias of our culture would affect you daily, you would feel it... and be unable to ignore how shitty it made you feel. You would be likely feel depressed, tense, and probably have less social motility as a result. As a white person you don't even have to consider it... You don't have to spend your time doing ANYTHING about it... you just get to live your life as normal, that is privilege. African Americans don't get to do that. Their daily list of things to do includes a list of things you don't have to worry about, such as "teach my son how to talk to police in a way that doesn't get him shot." That is a conversation you would never have with your kids because it sounds insane to say to them, but for other races of American citizens it is a very sane and potentially necessary conversation to have. As far as disentangling poverty from color of skin or race, I think that is a phonemically good question. In my opinion, it's the result of decades old damage done by slavery. Look at the Native American culture and African American culture, two cultures extremely harmed by white culture... both were left in poverty, white culture basically hamstrung them by essentially murdering and enslaving them all. Slaves have nothing, you set them free, they now have freedom... but still no money or home. How do you think that affects someone's social mobility? It destroys it. How many generations do you think it takes for a culture of people that were enslaved to get to a place of equal footing with the people that enslaved them? Our racism continued past slavery, we are not too far from 200 years since the end of overt slavery and many of the dynamics are still at play, and the imbalance is certainly there. The concept of "reparations" was born out of this very problem... which is the idea of giving up your privilege/power (in the case of reparations is money) so that underprivileged groups can have equal footing in society. It's as if white people said lets run a race, then as the race starts shot the African American runner in the leg and then pretended that never happened. Then the whole race we are like, "you just aren't trying hard enough man... you got to run faster if you ever want to make it to the finish line." First step in rectifying that situation... is to own that "you" or your culture/ancestors actually shot the other runner, and that the race isn't fair... to make if fair you don't need to shoot yourself per se (which is what I think most white people fear), but you need to do something drastic. At the very least, stop the race, nurture the shot runner, feed them for months until the wounds heal, then help them to get physical therapy and strength training... Then reschedule the race and run again if they feel fit and equal. That's what you give up, the privilege of ignoring the problem... you have to actually exert yourself to correct the fuck up of your ancestors... you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it, so that it somehow gets fixed. It is the responsibility of all white people to attend to the fuck ups of our ancestors. quite simply, you are projecting your last paragraph is totally devoid of content. it amounts to talking about talking about something: “you have to actually exert yourself [...] you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it.” well, mission accomplished then. we’ve done that. If that's all you took from that post, I gave you wayyyyyy more credit than you deserve as someone who I thought wanted to have a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture. "You're projecting" is just a cop out, I've made many valid points, none of which you are addressing. My guess is you don't have any answers, but that it's so much easier to just ignore the whole thing... Which really does reenforce what I'm saying.
No, see, I never said I wanted to have “a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture.” I originally asked you what privileges you’ve given up and you just keep hammering us with facts about systemic racism. I grant you all those facts, but they are irrelevant to the much narrower question I asked and the discussion I wanted to have.
You are projecting. I already know all the things relating to differences in outcomes between whites and blacks and grant you most of it. I don’t need an education from you about them. I’d wager I can give a better education than you can. But I am not the one here who claimed to have “answers” (to what? what are you talking about?). I had a question for you, which you’ve done your very best to avoid answering, but I think I know what the answer is. For you the answer to white privilege is to spread the Gospel of Privilege. Ok, that’s fine.
|
Your article is comparing degrees of racism... as if the racism in the US is "not so bad" as India. Racism is bad in all it's degrees.
The point of voter ID laws isn't security... there aren't Russian agents showing up in person to vote at American voter booths XD XD XD XD XD
Election security is about hacking machines and manipulating numbers.
Here's the brief history of voter ID laws in America:
Dems aren't worried about voter ID laws, republicans are. In that republicans want to implement laws that make it harder for the populous to vote.
"Restrictions on voting, virtually all imposed by Republicans, reflect rising partisanship, societal shifts producing a more diverse America, and the weakening of the Voting Rights Act by the Supreme Court in 2013.
In North Dakota, Republicans passed an ID law that disproportionally affected Native Americans, strong supporters of the state’s Democratic senator, Heidi Heitkamp, who is in an uphill fight. In Florida, New Hampshire, Texas and Wisconsin, among others, out-of-state university students face unusual hurdles to casting ballots."
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/11/03/us/politics/voting-suppression-elections.html
Voter disenfranchisement has been the age old republican strategy for winning elections, they have said so right out in the open. The majority of Americans lean democratic, so the more people that turn out to vote, the statistical higher chance there is for dems to win.
Republicans want to suppress voter turn out, it's literally the only way they can win elections.
|
On July 27 2019 01:39 Slydie wrote:Show nested quote +What I am suggesting is: How about Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Turkey, Norway, Finland each take 3-5k of these people in cages?
******NOT BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE US' RESPONSIBILITY******
*******BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED HELP******** Eh... how to send immigrants between countries is a very delicate and controversial topic. There has been a lot of controversy and arguments in Europe about this with Greece and Italy complaining the most. There are litterally millions of people in refugee camps in countries like Lebanon, Syria and Turkey I believe the US wants nothing to do with, but no children in cages afaik. Your ****s does not make your silly statement make any more sense. Why is my argument silly? Why should Europe not help when they hear about people starving in cages?
|
On July 27 2019 02:49 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2019 02:15 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 26 2019 08:11 IgnE wrote:On July 26 2019 03:46 ShambhalaWar wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2019 07:20 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 06:29 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 05:32 IgnE wrote:On July 19 2019 04:02 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 02:35 IgnE wrote:On July 19 2019 01:45 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 00:05 IgnE wrote:On July 18 2019 15:29 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 18 2019 13:46 IgnE wrote:On July 18 2019 13:20 ShambhalaWar wrote: [quote]
I would say the first step, and probably the most important is simply acknowledging that I have privilege, and giving up my ignorance about my privilege.
The nature of privilege is ignorance, the privileged people don't have to consider the problems other people do. So in regard to racial privilege, in acknowledging it I would think there comes some degree of commitment in calling it out when I see rather than just letting it slide because, "I'm white and it doesn't affect me."
If I'm playing a game a CSGO and I hear the N word (happens all the time), rather than just be ok with that, I can at the very least confront them on it, and report the account. There are many different versions of that... for example is I see a nazi symbol written on a wall, I can get a pen and mark over it.
Donate to a charity organization that combats racial inequality, march for black lives matter. I haven't done these latter two things, but for a lot of my black friends growing up I apologized for not believe them when we were kids, and tell them I believe them now.
Small steps, but if all privileged people did that, the world would change. I thought there was more to privilege than that. You don't sound like someone who's given much of any thought to the subject. What's the point of your post? Are you actually curious about my experience or just want something to rail against? The post GH made that I quoted, you sound exactly like the type of person that post describes. Equality feels like oppression for you, that true for you or you just never even gave it a thought? No, I'm actually just surprised at how little privilege you actually had to relinquish. It's almost like you didn't have much power in the first place. You really stretched there, too, with the suggestion to donate to BLM. Giving away money counts as giving away power I guess. But maybe the metaphorical language doesn't really work? Why do you think this idea that giving up privilege feels like oppression resonates with you so much when your examples of giving up privilege are so lame? I can think of something else that might better describe the experience of 1) conversion to a cause, 2) spreading the good news to blasphemers, and 3) tithing — but "relinquishing power" isn't it. I'll ask again... What is the point of your post? Does Equality feel like oppression for you? And if you don't think money is power, you are incredibly naive. I am trying to decide why this “relinquish (white) power” articulation seems so off to me. Who are the kind of people you imagine when you imagine indignant whites for whom giving up privilege feels like oppression? Are they people who can actually give up “power”? What kind of power do they have and don’t have, now, in 2019? And what kind of power do you gain as a “woke” white who can preach to others? I feel obliged to point out that 1) I acknowledged that giving money might be some kind of “relinquishing power” although such language feels overwrought — I’m not sure why that would be different in kind from other charitable giving or why it would feel oppressive and 2) you said you haven’t actually given money to BLM so it seems fairly moot. As for my personal opinion, no, equality doesn’t feel like oppression to me, hence my line of questioning. Personally, I am inclined more towards the idea of “recognition.” edit: given that someone posted a Nazi talking about “race-recognition” while I was typing this post, I have to now clarify that I meant “recognition” in the sense of Hegel or Levinas: recognition of the subject. Not some scientistic recognition of race, which we want to deconstruct anyway right? You speak like someone who really doesn't understand the concept of privilege, which is really the nature of it privilege... you don't have to worry about it because it doesn't directly affect you. If you are are white, there are a host of difficulties in life you don't have to worry about... In other words, day to day, you don't have to give these difficulties a second of thought, but minorities do, because they are affected by the difficulties. For example, as a white person, when you are pulled over by the police in America, you don't have to worry about being killed in the same way an African-American does. When you get pulled over you expect to pay a speeding ticket. When an African-American gets pulled over they have to worry they might die. The privileged person doesn't have to give a seconds thought to the latter problem, that is their privilege... To walk through life worrying about other things and thinking about things other than being killed by a cop. Let's use your word... recognition. If you "recognize" your privilege, that is the first step, Yay! After you recognize it, you can do other things to be allies for minority groups, and there are varying degrees of time and effort you can put toward that. But... by virtue of "recognizing" your privilege, you are in a sense giving up some degree of your power, because you can no longer just pretend minority groups aren't being persecuted. And it's also not enough to simply now "recognize" your privilege, you have to speak out against it... or be the person who knows and does nothing. No, I understand all that quite well. What am I trying to get at here is what you meant by “relinquishing power” and the particular resonance of “when you’ve been privileged, equality feels like oppression.” Don’t you find it curious that “privilege” is usually described via its lack? People of color lack certain presumptions of innocence, people of color lack certain presumptions of competence, people of color lack safety in their dealings with police. So what are we really talking about here? Giving up those presumptions? Giving up the privilege of ignoring people? If the “power” you give up is the power to “pretend” or the power not to sympathize it seems like a rather weak form of power. If that’s all it is, it’s not exactly clear how it’s related to some white people’s complaints that they aren’t particularly privileged. You might not even begrudge some redneck in West Virginia his complaints that he also lacks such presumptions (of competence, etc.), that he might even face worse presumptions, in 2019, than an upper class person of color dressed in a well-tailored suit who gets paid a bunch of money. Ah well, fuck the rednecks. If you dress like that, and wear a rat-tail, and drive a truck, and listen to country music you probably are ignorant and incompetent anyway. So you could make the same statement about a "red-neck" and competence (this is your example), technically that would be true... and would be the argument of reverse racism. It's essentially a standpoint of some white people, that they are too the victim in this. I'm not sure if that's the point you are trying to make, but you are dancing on that edge of people interpreting you that way. The problem with that is while in some sense maybe it is true, you are focusing on the most privileged group and the ways in which the might not have privilege... Therefore ignoring essentially 90% (or more) of the issue of privilege. No it’s not reverse racism. I’m not talking about a person’s of color presumptions about rednecks or even about race at all. Their being unprivileged need not be connected to race at all. I have absolutely no idea where you pulled that “90%” number from or why you think including white redneck West Virginians in a group that is “most privileged” is an especially astute or helpful way of grouping people. The whole point of this exercise has been to point out that if you think the children of two doctors of color in 2019 who live in a major city are unambiguously less “privileged” than some white children born in West Virginia to parents who didn’t complete high school and are living in a trailer, your concept of privilege is inadequate. (To heighten the point, consider black sons of NBA players, who are vastly vastly more likely than anyone else on the planet to play in the NBA). You haven’t mentioned “intersectionality” yet, but maybe you should pick it up. Show nested quote +And for the record I still don't think you get it, but I encourage you to try a bit more to consider yourself and how much easier your life is day to day, because when you walk into a grocery store people aren't eyeing you the whole time to see if you are going to steal something. For the record, even if I thought you were a moron I wouldn’t let that opinion distract me from engaging with what you’ve actually said, and I don’t see why you should attempt to let your assumptions about me carry the argument for you either. In any case, let’s say I had never ever considered before how my experience shopping might be different than that of a person of color. Now I’ve had the epiphany: Wow! They get followed by security some times! Ok. Now what power do I have to give up to rectify that situation (even if I’m the security guard?!?)? Show nested quote +By virtue of being born white in the US you have an exponentially disproportionate lower risk of being incarcerated in your life time than and African American person. * That alone is massive privilege. If you get stuck in that system of incarceration it will chew you up and spit you out broken. Imagine if I told you today, as of today you are 5 times more likely to be locked up than prior in your life, and you knew this to be true for a fact. Do you think that would increase your daily stress? How would you feel the next time you get pulled over for speeding? How would your relationship to police officers change (would you still see them has here to help you)? How would your life change if you actually got locked up (maybe you lost your privilege to have your vote counted)? Maybe you got killed in prison... https://www.motherjones.com/crime-justice/2018/02/the-race-gap-in-u-s-prisons-is-glaring-and-poverty-is-making-it-worse/This is just one example of the many you don't have to worry about because you are white, are you going to tell me that is a weak effect? Yeah I know all that. I don’t see what privileges I have to give up in order for this not to happen, or how anything you’ve talked about relating to your awokening bears on this beyond the fact that you are no longer ignorant of it. This also raises issues of boundary-drawing which your own source points out. How do we disentangle blackness from poverty or from even more difficult to capture factors like community cohesion, family structures, attitudes, etc.? Show nested quote +If you were born black back in the days of slavery you had a 100% chance of ending up a slave. How do you think that would have affected your life?
A weak affect? I’ve been very careful to say “in 2019” repeatedly. I wasn’t born in the days of slavery and neither were you. To your first point, privilege is directly tied to race... you cannot separate the two, this is true world wide. Race has been shown throughout human history to carry favor in regard to cultural classes. And historically/generally, people with darker skin are persecuted simply for that fact. I don't think that statement is up for debate. "Bleaching skin" to a lighter color is a cultural phenomenon in India because there simply a skin color bias. People actually attempt to stain their skin to a lighter color so they are less dark skinned. http://theconversation.com/bleached-girls-india-and-its-love-for-light-skin-80655In India, it doesn't matter if you are poor or rich, if you have lighter skin you are likely to be favored by society. The same is true in America... If you are a white redneck in West Virginia, you are going to be favored in society based simply on the fact you have white skin. That doesn't mean you won't be treated poorly based on other characteristics, such as the perception/stereotype of how people might negatively view being a "redneck," but you will for sure carry advantage in American culture for being white. That statement is also not up for debate imo. There is a huge body of research that supports it, studies in police violence, poverty, discrimination in housing, white people getting more favorable sentences in the justice system... this list goes on. In your example of a doctor with 2 black kids, you are looking very myopically at the fact their father was a doctor or an NBA player. Below is a recent example (there are more if you just research it) of an NBA player who was tazered by police for no good reason. If you consider an NBA player part of a privileged class of society (because of money), then it is a striking thing to note that he gets tazered... the conclusion many people draw is that it is because he was black. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/23/613657447/milwaukee-police-disciplined-for-tasing-arrest-of-nba-playerBelow is a black senator who states he was pulled over 6-7 times in one year, I (not a senator, or rich, but white) have been pulled over maybe 1 time in the last 4-5 years (maybe more). https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/13/politics/tim-scott-police-racial-profiling/index.htmlMy point is that despite position in class or society, African Americans face discrimination that white people don't... that occurs despite financial status. You can bet that if you are poor and African American it will happen wayyyyyy more, that if you are rich and African American. But please take your time, and find me any example in the last decade of a white NBA player who was tasered for no good reason by a cop. I just did a google search, "white man harassed by cop." Every example on the page that turned up was of a black man being harassed by police or someone harassing police. You did a great job of saying the word, "intersectionality" but don't describe at all how it contributes to your comments. Intersectionality is important, it means to not have a myopic view in considering discrimination and abuse of power. For example, not just being black in America, but also poor and how the two dynamics interact together. Or being white and poor, there you have a mix of privilege (being white), and lack of privilege (being poor). In your early statements you seem unable to consider both of these things being able to exist in the same space, in your comments about redneck people. It's as if you think, how can they be white poor and privileged... as if being poor negates any form of privilege from being white... That is exactly what intersectionality address imo... That both things can and do occur in the same space... you can be privilege in some ways and not privileged in others. I'm not making my comments as a judgement toward you, I make them because you speak like someone who in my subjective opinion doesn't understand the dynamics of privilege... as a white person I try to make an effort to help other white Americans understand what their privilege is and how it affects others, and how we can consciously work with our privilege to balance the imbalance it creates in society. I am far from the person with the most understanding or expertise in this area (many more know much more than me), but I know something and I'm trying to do something about it, rather than ignore it (even if it is just talking to you in a forum). You weren't born in a time of overt slavery, and you didn't enslave anyone... but you absolutely were born in a culture that at one point it time was ubiquitous with the practice of slavery, and because of being born white you benefitted from the cultural imbalance that was created (and was never fully corrected) from the practice of slavery so many years ago. The only reason you don't know that, is because people know what affects them. If you had dark skin, the bias of our culture would affect you daily, you would feel it... and be unable to ignore how shitty it made you feel. You would be likely feel depressed, tense, and probably have less social motility as a result. As a white person you don't even have to consider it... You don't have to spend your time doing ANYTHING about it... you just get to live your life as normal, that is privilege. African Americans don't get to do that. Their daily list of things to do includes a list of things you don't have to worry about, such as "teach my son how to talk to police in a way that doesn't get him shot." That is a conversation you would never have with your kids because it sounds insane to say to them, but for other races of American citizens it is a very sane and potentially necessary conversation to have. As far as disentangling poverty from color of skin or race, I think that is a phonemically good question. In my opinion, it's the result of decades old damage done by slavery. Look at the Native American culture and African American culture, two cultures extremely harmed by white culture... both were left in poverty, white culture basically hamstrung them by essentially murdering and enslaving them all. Slaves have nothing, you set them free, they now have freedom... but still no money or home. How do you think that affects someone's social mobility? It destroys it. How many generations do you think it takes for a culture of people that were enslaved to get to a place of equal footing with the people that enslaved them? Our racism continued past slavery, we are not too far from 200 years since the end of overt slavery and many of the dynamics are still at play, and the imbalance is certainly there. The concept of "reparations" was born out of this very problem... which is the idea of giving up your privilege/power (in the case of reparations is money) so that underprivileged groups can have equal footing in society. It's as if white people said lets run a race, then as the race starts shot the African American runner in the leg and then pretended that never happened. Then the whole race we are like, "you just aren't trying hard enough man... you got to run faster if you ever want to make it to the finish line." First step in rectifying that situation... is to own that "you" or your culture/ancestors actually shot the other runner, and that the race isn't fair... to make if fair you don't need to shoot yourself per se (which is what I think most white people fear), but you need to do something drastic. At the very least, stop the race, nurture the shot runner, feed them for months until the wounds heal, then help them to get physical therapy and strength training... Then reschedule the race and run again if they feel fit and equal. That's what you give up, the privilege of ignoring the problem... you have to actually exert yourself to correct the fuck up of your ancestors... you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it, so that it somehow gets fixed. It is the responsibility of all white people to attend to the fuck ups of our ancestors. quite simply, you are projecting your last paragraph is totally devoid of content. it amounts to talking about talking about something: “you have to actually exert yourself [...] you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it.” well, mission accomplished then. we’ve done that. If that's all you took from that post, I gave you wayyyyyy more credit than you deserve as someone who I thought wanted to have a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture. "You're projecting" is just a cop out, I've made many valid points, none of which you are addressing. My guess is you don't have any answers, but that it's so much easier to just ignore the whole thing... Which really does reenforce what I'm saying. No, see, I never said I wanted to have “a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture.” I originally asked you what privileges you’ve given up and you just keep hammering us with facts about systemic racism. I grant you all those facts, but they are irrelevant to the much narrower question I asked and the discussion I wanted to have. You are projecting. I already know all the things relating to differences in outcomes between whites and blacks and grant you most of it. I don’t need an education from you about them. I’d wager I can give a better education than you can. But I am not the one here who claimed to have “answers” (to what? what are you talking about?). I had a question for you, which you’ve done your very best to avoid answering, but I think I know what the answer is. For you the answer to white privilege is to spread the Gospel of Privilege. Ok, that’s fine.
I've addressed your question in depth and multiple times, "What am I trying to get at here is what you meant by “relinquishing power” and the particular resonance of “when you’ve been privileged, equality feels like oppression.” Don’t you find it curious that “privilege” is usually described via its lack?"
Either you don't like the answer or really having taken much time to try and understand what I'm saying.
If privilege is confusing for you, but you believe the concept is true, then please explain to me how you see it operating in the present day culture?
|
I presume that Shambhala's idea is the recognition of privilege is the first step towards dissolving that privilege and bringing everyone to an equal playing field.
The eventual line of "Okay, but how do we actually -do- that?" is a very valid line, and I recognize both Shambhala's pointing to a system that we are a part of as unjust and in need of change, as well as IgnE's challenge on that front (It's skipping a few steps, so forgive me if I'm off the mark) that seems to suggest a question along the lines of "Okay, so you're a privileged individual in a system of systemic racism. Where is the line between admitting that feeling morally good + Show Spoiler + akin to a confession of sins and actually -doing something about it- or actually giving anything up?"
Personally, I am a privileged white male and the only thing I have been willing to 'risk', honestly, is recognizing and changing my own implicit bias against races in a culture that largely is supportive and accepting of that recognition. My choices, again part of the privilege, is to be casually racist and be 'normal' or gently actively oppose racism and be 'good'.
For the record I have really appreciated both sides of the conversation. Y'all are well-spoken.
|
On July 27 2019 01:02 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 26 2019 14:14 KwarK wrote:On July 26 2019 14:02 Mohdoo wrote:On July 26 2019 13:13 Falling wrote: I personally like Lindsey Graham's solution, although it looks like Democrats are blocking the ability to vote on it for now.
The main thing I like is that you need to apply from Mexico or a home country, not the US. The big problem it seems is that the facilities are simply not adequate to the volume of people trying to get through. This breaks the system because they simply cannot process in time, which forces officials to release families after 20 days. In a perverse way, this creates the unintended consequences of simply getting to the border with a child, any child and try to force the system to release you, plus it creates a giant market for bad actors in the human smuggling business.
So requiring to apply from outside the US, you immediately get rid of the ticking time bomb of the terrible holding conditions and you don't need to waste money expanding holding facilities. And then you cut out the market for human smugglers that might just abandon their 'cargo' to suffocate or die of dehydration because they can't pay enough.
As a result, Graham wants to add 500 new immigration judges which would expedite the waiting lines and then he's willing to negotiate on sending aid to South American countries as a bone for Democrats/ maybe helping with some of the economics push factors that generates the desire to emigrate out.
Seems like a good idea to me. It shouldn't just be our local continents helping. If we have a humanitarian refugee crisis, we should be asking other big countries to help. Maybe I'm missing something, but once you transport an immigrant somewhere, isn't it the same as being in the US? If we sent like 5k people to each of like 30 countries, it would help a lot. Totally worth the price of transportation. My preference is the US handles it because we have available wealth. But if we're not, it's not like it's required to be physically connected. The US has a pretty low asylum cap for its population and wealth. It'd be wrong to think that other countries aren't doing their fair share. The US is doing very little, and somehow still failing at it. If you see a really buff dude laughing at someone stuck under a tree, you should still try your best to help the person under the tree. When the buff guy is laughing and clearly totally uninterested in helping, you should do your best, even if you aren't buff. I am not saying it isn't the US' responsibility. It is. But there are many instances where the responsible party is not the one to solve a problem. Trump's cabinet + McConnell's senate means we're gonna keep starving children. You could argue the US is creating refugees from refugees/immigrants. These are people who are being submitted to unreasonable suffering and starvation on a wide scale with no hope of things getting better. That is a situation where Europe or other major countries should be reaching out to help. The sad reality is that people in the US need to be rescued. I would love for the US to solve this problem ourselves, but if you were to estimate the chances of Trump treating these people humanely, what % what you come up with? What I am suggesting is: How about Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Turkey, Norway, Finland each take 3-5k of these people in cages? ******NOT BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE US' RESPONSIBILITY****** *******BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED HELP********
The US is really good at creating refugees.
We are already dealing with a few million of those due to you constantly fucking shit up in the middle east (In this case, specifically, due to the Iraq war leading into the Syrian civil war).
I must say that i would find it exceptionally funny how much you complain about refugees after basically creating a giant refugee situation for Europe and not giving a fuck about dealing with it if it weren't so sad.
Yes, it would honestly probably be for the best to just rescue the people out of the US concentration camps, and we probably should do that. Along with that we should also recognize that the US a major creator of problems, and deal with them accordingly instead of trying to view them as an ally. And we should recognize that the US simply cannot be at the adults table in international dealings, because they can not deal with problems like an adult country. You have a few thousand refugees at your border, and stuff just implodes.
Germany, a country with about 1/4s of your citizens, has had to deal with more than a million refugees in 2015 (Due to problems that YOU created), and we managed to do that without concentration camps.
Your problems are not unsolvable, you just choose not to solve them, and to put people into concentration camps instead.
|
On July 27 2019 03:01 ShambhalaWar wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2019 02:49 IgnE wrote:On July 27 2019 02:15 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 26 2019 08:11 IgnE wrote:On July 26 2019 03:46 ShambhalaWar wrote:+ Show Spoiler +On July 19 2019 07:20 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On July 19 2019 06:29 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 05:32 IgnE wrote:On July 19 2019 04:02 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 02:35 IgnE wrote:On July 19 2019 01:45 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 19 2019 00:05 IgnE wrote:On July 18 2019 15:29 ShambhalaWar wrote:On July 18 2019 13:46 IgnE wrote:On July 18 2019 13:20 ShambhalaWar wrote: [quote]
I would say the first step, and probably the most important is simply acknowledging that I have privilege, and giving up my ignorance about my privilege.
The nature of privilege is ignorance, the privileged people don't have to consider the problems other people do. So in regard to racial privilege, in acknowledging it I would think there comes some degree of commitment in calling it out when I see rather than just letting it slide because, "I'm white and it doesn't affect me."
If I'm playing a game a CSGO and I hear the N word (happens all the time), rather than just be ok with that, I can at the very least confront them on it, and report the account. There are many different versions of that... for example is I see a nazi symbol written on a wall, I can get a pen and mark over it.
Donate to a charity organization that combats racial inequality, march for black lives matter. I haven't done these latter two things, but for a lot of my black friends growing up I apologized for not believe them when we were kids, and tell them I believe them now.
Small steps, but if all privileged people did that, the world would change. I thought there was more to privilege than that. You don't sound like someone who's given much of any thought to the subject. What's the point of your post? Are you actually curious about my experience or just want something to rail against? The post GH made that I quoted, you sound exactly like the type of person that post describes. Equality feels like oppression for you, that true for you or you just never even gave it a thought? No, I'm actually just surprised at how little privilege you actually had to relinquish. It's almost like you didn't have much power in the first place. You really stretched there, too, with the suggestion to donate to BLM. Giving away money counts as giving away power I guess. But maybe the metaphorical language doesn't really work? Why do you think this idea that giving up privilege feels like oppression resonates with you so much when your examples of giving up privilege are so lame? I can think of something else that might better describe the experience of 1) conversion to a cause, 2) spreading the good news to blasphemers, and 3) tithing — but "relinquishing power" isn't it. I'll ask again... What is the point of your post? Does Equality feel like oppression for you? And if you don't think money is power, you are incredibly naive. I am trying to decide why this “relinquish (white) power” articulation seems so off to me. Who are the kind of people you imagine when you imagine indignant whites for whom giving up privilege feels like oppression? Are they people who can actually give up “power”? What kind of power do they have and don’t have, now, in 2019? And what kind of power do you gain as a “woke” white who can preach to others? I feel obliged to point out that 1) I acknowledged that giving money might be some kind of “relinquishing power” although such language feels overwrought — I’m not sure why that would be different in kind from other charitable giving or why it would feel oppressive and 2) you said you haven’t actually given money to BLM so it seems fairly moot. As for my personal opinion, no, equality doesn’t feel like oppression to me, hence my line of questioning. Personally, I am inclined more towards the idea of “recognition.” edit: given that someone posted a Nazi talking about “race-recognition” while I was typing this post, I have to now clarify that I meant “recognition” in the sense of Hegel or Levinas: recognition of the subject. Not some scientistic recognition of race, which we want to deconstruct anyway right? You speak like someone who really doesn't understand the concept of privilege, which is really the nature of it privilege... you don't have to worry about it because it doesn't directly affect you. If you are are white, there are a host of difficulties in life you don't have to worry about... In other words, day to day, you don't have to give these difficulties a second of thought, but minorities do, because they are affected by the difficulties. For example, as a white person, when you are pulled over by the police in America, you don't have to worry about being killed in the same way an African-American does. When you get pulled over you expect to pay a speeding ticket. When an African-American gets pulled over they have to worry they might die. The privileged person doesn't have to give a seconds thought to the latter problem, that is their privilege... To walk through life worrying about other things and thinking about things other than being killed by a cop. Let's use your word... recognition. If you "recognize" your privilege, that is the first step, Yay! After you recognize it, you can do other things to be allies for minority groups, and there are varying degrees of time and effort you can put toward that. But... by virtue of "recognizing" your privilege, you are in a sense giving up some degree of your power, because you can no longer just pretend minority groups aren't being persecuted. And it's also not enough to simply now "recognize" your privilege, you have to speak out against it... or be the person who knows and does nothing. No, I understand all that quite well. What am I trying to get at here is what you meant by “relinquishing power” and the particular resonance of “when you’ve been privileged, equality feels like oppression.” Don’t you find it curious that “privilege” is usually described via its lack? People of color lack certain presumptions of innocence, people of color lack certain presumptions of competence, people of color lack safety in their dealings with police. So what are we really talking about here? Giving up those presumptions? Giving up the privilege of ignoring people? If the “power” you give up is the power to “pretend” or the power not to sympathize it seems like a rather weak form of power. If that’s all it is, it’s not exactly clear how it’s related to some white people’s complaints that they aren’t particularly privileged. You might not even begrudge some redneck in West Virginia his complaints that he also lacks such presumptions (of competence, etc.), that he might even face worse presumptions, in 2019, than an upper class person of color dressed in a well-tailored suit who gets paid a bunch of money. Ah well, fuck the rednecks. If you dress like that, and wear a rat-tail, and drive a truck, and listen to country music you probably are ignorant and incompetent anyway. So you could make the same statement about a "red-neck" and competence (this is your example), technically that would be true... and would be the argument of reverse racism. It's essentially a standpoint of some white people, that they are too the victim in this. I'm not sure if that's the point you are trying to make, but you are dancing on that edge of people interpreting you that way. The problem with that is while in some sense maybe it is true, you are focusing on the most privileged group and the ways in which the might not have privilege... Therefore ignoring essentially 90% (or more) of the issue of privilege. No it’s not reverse racism. I’m not talking about a person’s of color presumptions about rednecks or even about race at all. Their being unprivileged need not be connected to race at all. I have absolutely no idea where you pulled that “90%” number from or why you think including white redneck West Virginians in a group that is “most privileged” is an especially astute or helpful way of grouping people. The whole point of this exercise has been to point out that if you think the children of two doctors of color in 2019 who live in a major city are unambiguously less “privileged” than some white children born in West Virginia to parents who didn’t complete high school and are living in a trailer, your concept of privilege is inadequate. (To heighten the point, consider black sons of NBA players, who are vastly vastly more likely than anyone else on the planet to play in the NBA). You haven’t mentioned “intersectionality” yet, but maybe you should pick it up. Show nested quote +And for the record I still don't think you get it, but I encourage you to try a bit more to consider yourself and how much easier your life is day to day, because when you walk into a grocery store people aren't eyeing you the whole time to see if you are going to steal something. For the record, even if I thought you were a moron I wouldn’t let that opinion distract me from engaging with what you’ve actually said, and I don’t see why you should attempt to let your assumptions about me carry the argument for you either. In any case, let’s say I had never ever considered before how my experience shopping might be different than that of a person of color. Now I’ve had the epiphany: Wow! They get followed by security some times! Ok. Now what power do I have to give up to rectify that situation (even if I’m the security guard?!?)? Show nested quote +By virtue of being born white in the US you have an exponentially disproportionate lower risk of being incarcerated in your life time than and African American person. * That alone is massive privilege. If you get stuck in that system of incarceration it will chew you up and spit you out broken. Imagine if I told you today, as of today you are 5 times more likely to be locked up than prior in your life, and you knew this to be true for a fact. Do you think that would increase your daily stress? How would you feel the next time you get pulled over for speeding? How would your relationship to police officers change (would you still see them has here to help you)? How would your life change if you actually got locked up (maybe you lost your privilege to have your vote counted)? Maybe you got killed in prison... https://www.motherjones.com/crime-justice/2018/02/the-race-gap-in-u-s-prisons-is-glaring-and-poverty-is-making-it-worse/This is just one example of the many you don't have to worry about because you are white, are you going to tell me that is a weak effect? Yeah I know all that. I don’t see what privileges I have to give up in order for this not to happen, or how anything you’ve talked about relating to your awokening bears on this beyond the fact that you are no longer ignorant of it. This also raises issues of boundary-drawing which your own source points out. How do we disentangle blackness from poverty or from even more difficult to capture factors like community cohesion, family structures, attitudes, etc.? Show nested quote +If you were born black back in the days of slavery you had a 100% chance of ending up a slave. How do you think that would have affected your life?
A weak affect? I’ve been very careful to say “in 2019” repeatedly. I wasn’t born in the days of slavery and neither were you. To your first point, privilege is directly tied to race... you cannot separate the two, this is true world wide. Race has been shown throughout human history to carry favor in regard to cultural classes. And historically/generally, people with darker skin are persecuted simply for that fact. I don't think that statement is up for debate. "Bleaching skin" to a lighter color is a cultural phenomenon in India because there simply a skin color bias. People actually attempt to stain their skin to a lighter color so they are less dark skinned. http://theconversation.com/bleached-girls-india-and-its-love-for-light-skin-80655In India, it doesn't matter if you are poor or rich, if you have lighter skin you are likely to be favored by society. The same is true in America... If you are a white redneck in West Virginia, you are going to be favored in society based simply on the fact you have white skin. That doesn't mean you won't be treated poorly based on other characteristics, such as the perception/stereotype of how people might negatively view being a "redneck," but you will for sure carry advantage in American culture for being white. That statement is also not up for debate imo. There is a huge body of research that supports it, studies in police violence, poverty, discrimination in housing, white people getting more favorable sentences in the justice system... this list goes on. In your example of a doctor with 2 black kids, you are looking very myopically at the fact their father was a doctor or an NBA player. Below is a recent example (there are more if you just research it) of an NBA player who was tazered by police for no good reason. If you consider an NBA player part of a privileged class of society (because of money), then it is a striking thing to note that he gets tazered... the conclusion many people draw is that it is because he was black. https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2018/05/23/613657447/milwaukee-police-disciplined-for-tasing-arrest-of-nba-playerBelow is a black senator who states he was pulled over 6-7 times in one year, I (not a senator, or rich, but white) have been pulled over maybe 1 time in the last 4-5 years (maybe more). https://www.cnn.com/2016/07/13/politics/tim-scott-police-racial-profiling/index.htmlMy point is that despite position in class or society, African Americans face discrimination that white people don't... that occurs despite financial status. You can bet that if you are poor and African American it will happen wayyyyyy more, that if you are rich and African American. But please take your time, and find me any example in the last decade of a white NBA player who was tasered for no good reason by a cop. I just did a google search, "white man harassed by cop." Every example on the page that turned up was of a black man being harassed by police or someone harassing police. You did a great job of saying the word, "intersectionality" but don't describe at all how it contributes to your comments. Intersectionality is important, it means to not have a myopic view in considering discrimination and abuse of power. For example, not just being black in America, but also poor and how the two dynamics interact together. Or being white and poor, there you have a mix of privilege (being white), and lack of privilege (being poor). In your early statements you seem unable to consider both of these things being able to exist in the same space, in your comments about redneck people. It's as if you think, how can they be white poor and privileged... as if being poor negates any form of privilege from being white... That is exactly what intersectionality address imo... That both things can and do occur in the same space... you can be privilege in some ways and not privileged in others. I'm not making my comments as a judgement toward you, I make them because you speak like someone who in my subjective opinion doesn't understand the dynamics of privilege... as a white person I try to make an effort to help other white Americans understand what their privilege is and how it affects others, and how we can consciously work with our privilege to balance the imbalance it creates in society. I am far from the person with the most understanding or expertise in this area (many more know much more than me), but I know something and I'm trying to do something about it, rather than ignore it (even if it is just talking to you in a forum). You weren't born in a time of overt slavery, and you didn't enslave anyone... but you absolutely were born in a culture that at one point it time was ubiquitous with the practice of slavery, and because of being born white you benefitted from the cultural imbalance that was created (and was never fully corrected) from the practice of slavery so many years ago. The only reason you don't know that, is because people know what affects them. If you had dark skin, the bias of our culture would affect you daily, you would feel it... and be unable to ignore how shitty it made you feel. You would be likely feel depressed, tense, and probably have less social motility as a result. As a white person you don't even have to consider it... You don't have to spend your time doing ANYTHING about it... you just get to live your life as normal, that is privilege. African Americans don't get to do that. Their daily list of things to do includes a list of things you don't have to worry about, such as "teach my son how to talk to police in a way that doesn't get him shot." That is a conversation you would never have with your kids because it sounds insane to say to them, but for other races of American citizens it is a very sane and potentially necessary conversation to have. As far as disentangling poverty from color of skin or race, I think that is a phonemically good question. In my opinion, it's the result of decades old damage done by slavery. Look at the Native American culture and African American culture, two cultures extremely harmed by white culture... both were left in poverty, white culture basically hamstrung them by essentially murdering and enslaving them all. Slaves have nothing, you set them free, they now have freedom... but still no money or home. How do you think that affects someone's social mobility? It destroys it. How many generations do you think it takes for a culture of people that were enslaved to get to a place of equal footing with the people that enslaved them? Our racism continued past slavery, we are not too far from 200 years since the end of overt slavery and many of the dynamics are still at play, and the imbalance is certainly there. The concept of "reparations" was born out of this very problem... which is the idea of giving up your privilege/power (in the case of reparations is money) so that underprivileged groups can have equal footing in society. It's as if white people said lets run a race, then as the race starts shot the African American runner in the leg and then pretended that never happened. Then the whole race we are like, "you just aren't trying hard enough man... you got to run faster if you ever want to make it to the finish line." First step in rectifying that situation... is to own that "you" or your culture/ancestors actually shot the other runner, and that the race isn't fair... to make if fair you don't need to shoot yourself per se (which is what I think most white people fear), but you need to do something drastic. At the very least, stop the race, nurture the shot runner, feed them for months until the wounds heal, then help them to get physical therapy and strength training... Then reschedule the race and run again if they feel fit and equal. That's what you give up, the privilege of ignoring the problem... you have to actually exert yourself to correct the fuck up of your ancestors... you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it, so that it somehow gets fixed. It is the responsibility of all white people to attend to the fuck ups of our ancestors. quite simply, you are projecting your last paragraph is totally devoid of content. it amounts to talking about talking about something: “you have to actually exert yourself [...] you have to actually talk about the problem and acknowledge it.” well, mission accomplished then. we’ve done that. If that's all you took from that post, I gave you wayyyyyy more credit than you deserve as someone who I thought wanted to have a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture. "You're projecting" is just a cop out, I've made many valid points, none of which you are addressing. My guess is you don't have any answers, but that it's so much easier to just ignore the whole thing... Which really does reenforce what I'm saying. No, see, I never said I wanted to have “a discussion about the blind spots of white American culture.” I originally asked you what privileges you’ve given up and you just keep hammering us with facts about systemic racism. I grant you all those facts, but they are irrelevant to the much narrower question I asked and the discussion I wanted to have. You are projecting. I already know all the things relating to differences in outcomes between whites and blacks and grant you most of it. I don’t need an education from you about them. I’d wager I can give a better education than you can. But I am not the one here who claimed to have “answers” (to what? what are you talking about?). I had a question for you, which you’ve done your very best to avoid answering, but I think I know what the answer is. For you the answer to white privilege is to spread the Gospel of Privilege. Ok, that’s fine. I've addressed your question in depth and multiple times, "What am I trying to get at here is what you meant by “relinquishing power” and the particular resonance of “when you’ve been privileged, equality feels like oppression.” Don’t you find it curious that “privilege” is usually described via its lack?" Either you don't like the answer or really having taken much time to try and understand what I'm saying. If privilege is confusing for you, but you believe the concept is true, then please explain to me how you see it operating in the present day culture?
Why did you quote my question but not your supposed answer? Why are you asking me why I’m confused about “privilege” tout court when my question was specifically about “relinquishing privilege.” I was asking about the sense of the phrase, as a whole. I understand quite well what you are saying, but I feel like I’m talking to a bot who is responding to keywords rather than the locutionary sense of my posts.
Assume I know exactly what you understand privilege to be. Now tell me what, specifically, you as a white person with privilege are relinquishing and/or need to relinquish in order to achieve justice.
I just think that the language used in the Gospel of Privilege does not correspond to the phenomenological experience of whiteness, nor is it the best articulation of action, properly conceived, which could rectify injustice.
|
On July 27 2019 02:59 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2019 01:39 Slydie wrote:What I am suggesting is: How about Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Turkey, Norway, Finland each take 3-5k of these people in cages?
******NOT BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE US' RESPONSIBILITY******
*******BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED HELP******** Eh... how to send immigrants between countries is a very delicate and controversial topic. There has been a lot of controversy and arguments in Europe about this with Greece and Italy complaining the most. There are litterally millions of people in refugee camps in countries like Lebanon, Syria and Turkey I believe the US wants nothing to do with, but no children in cages afaik. Your ****s does not make your silly statement make any more sense. Why is my argument silly? Why should Europe not help when they hear about people starving in cages? I guess US news doesn't bother with none US news so do yourself a favor and google the European immigration crisis and see that 'we' have our own problems with large immigration numbers and no one in Europe want a couple of extra thousand refugees just because the US is unable to provide food and a toothbrush.
|
On July 27 2019 03:12 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2019 02:59 Mohdoo wrote:On July 27 2019 01:39 Slydie wrote:What I am suggesting is: How about Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Turkey, Norway, Finland each take 3-5k of these people in cages?
******NOT BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE US' RESPONSIBILITY******
*******BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED HELP******** Eh... how to send immigrants between countries is a very delicate and controversial topic. There has been a lot of controversy and arguments in Europe about this with Greece and Italy complaining the most. There are litterally millions of people in refugee camps in countries like Lebanon, Syria and Turkey I believe the US wants nothing to do with, but no children in cages afaik. Your ****s does not make your silly statement make any more sense. Why is my argument silly? Why should Europe not help when they hear about people starving in cages? I guess US news doesn't bother with none US news so do yourself a favor and google the European immigration crisis and see that 'we' have our own problems with large immigration numbers and no one in Europe want a couple of extra thousand refugees just because the US is unable to provide food and a toothbrush.
So when the US is putting people in cages and starving them, who should be the ones to help the people suffering?
|
On July 27 2019 03:15 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2019 03:12 Gorsameth wrote:On July 27 2019 02:59 Mohdoo wrote:On July 27 2019 01:39 Slydie wrote:What I am suggesting is: How about Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Turkey, Norway, Finland each take 3-5k of these people in cages?
******NOT BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE US' RESPONSIBILITY******
*******BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED HELP******** Eh... how to send immigrants between countries is a very delicate and controversial topic. There has been a lot of controversy and arguments in Europe about this with Greece and Italy complaining the most. There are litterally millions of people in refugee camps in countries like Lebanon, Syria and Turkey I believe the US wants nothing to do with, but no children in cages afaik. Your ****s does not make your silly statement make any more sense. Why is my argument silly? Why should Europe not help when they hear about people starving in cages? I guess US news doesn't bother with none US news so do yourself a favor and google the European immigration crisis and see that 'we' have our own problems with large immigration numbers and no one in Europe want a couple of extra thousand refugees just because the US is unable to provide food and a toothbrush. So when the US is putting people in cages and starving them, who should be the ones to help the people suffering? Americans. Americans can make it so US doesn't put people in cages and starve them.
_______________
You are supposed to choose a less discriminatory country.
|
On July 27 2019 03:15 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2019 03:12 Gorsameth wrote:On July 27 2019 02:59 Mohdoo wrote:On July 27 2019 01:39 Slydie wrote:What I am suggesting is: How about Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Turkey, Norway, Finland each take 3-5k of these people in cages?
******NOT BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE US' RESPONSIBILITY******
*******BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED HELP******** Eh... how to send immigrants between countries is a very delicate and controversial topic. There has been a lot of controversy and arguments in Europe about this with Greece and Italy complaining the most. There are litterally millions of people in refugee camps in countries like Lebanon, Syria and Turkey I believe the US wants nothing to do with, but no children in cages afaik. Your ****s does not make your silly statement make any more sense. Why is my argument silly? Why should Europe not help when they hear about people starving in cages? I guess US news doesn't bother with none US news so do yourself a favor and google the European immigration crisis and see that 'we' have our own problems with large immigration numbers and no one in Europe want a couple of extra thousand refugees just because the US is unable to provide food and a toothbrush. So when the US is putting people in cages and starving them, who should be the ones to help the people suffering? Have you considered not putting them in cages and starving them? Seriously, this isn't rocket science.
Put a million people infront of the capital demanding better treatment rather then wonder if maybe you can fly em to the EU and dumb your shit in someone elses backyard.
|
On July 27 2019 03:24 Gorsameth wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2019 03:15 Mohdoo wrote:On July 27 2019 03:12 Gorsameth wrote:On July 27 2019 02:59 Mohdoo wrote:On July 27 2019 01:39 Slydie wrote:What I am suggesting is: How about Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Turkey, Norway, Finland each take 3-5k of these people in cages?
******NOT BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE US' RESPONSIBILITY******
*******BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED HELP******** Eh... how to send immigrants between countries is a very delicate and controversial topic. There has been a lot of controversy and arguments in Europe about this with Greece and Italy complaining the most. There are litterally millions of people in refugee camps in countries like Lebanon, Syria and Turkey I believe the US wants nothing to do with, but no children in cages afaik. Your ****s does not make your silly statement make any more sense. Why is my argument silly? Why should Europe not help when they hear about people starving in cages? I guess US news doesn't bother with none US news so do yourself a favor and google the European immigration crisis and see that 'we' have our own problems with large immigration numbers and no one in Europe want a couple of extra thousand refugees just because the US is unable to provide food and a toothbrush. So when the US is putting people in cages and starving them, who should be the ones to help the people suffering? Have you considered not putting them in cages and starving them? Seriously, this isn't rocket science. Put a million people infront of the capital demanding better treatment rather then wonder if maybe you can fly em to the EU and dumb your shit in someone elses backyard.
Who are you addressing? Me? Director of ice? Trump? I am a voter who voted and protests. I donate to organizations to make things better. I am politically active.
I think you are fundamentally misunderstanding my thesis. I am saying since the US is the bad guy here, creating problems with our bad guy government, the good guys should save the day.
We don't say "well North Korea, how about feed your people and stop building nukes?". Instead, we talk among ourselves how we can deal with bad actors. You are misunderstanding the situation if you see the US as potentially helpful in this situation.
|
|
On July 27 2019 03:47 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On July 27 2019 03:24 Gorsameth wrote:On July 27 2019 03:15 Mohdoo wrote:On July 27 2019 03:12 Gorsameth wrote:On July 27 2019 02:59 Mohdoo wrote:On July 27 2019 01:39 Slydie wrote:What I am suggesting is: How about Sweden, Switzerland, Iceland, Germany, Spain, South Korea, Japan, Canada, Italy, France, Turkey, Norway, Finland each take 3-5k of these people in cages?
******NOT BECAUSE IT ISN'T THE US' RESPONSIBILITY******
*******BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE NEED HELP******** Eh... how to send immigrants between countries is a very delicate and controversial topic. There has been a lot of controversy and arguments in Europe about this with Greece and Italy complaining the most. There are litterally millions of people in refugee camps in countries like Lebanon, Syria and Turkey I believe the US wants nothing to do with, but no children in cages afaik. Your ****s does not make your silly statement make any more sense. Why is my argument silly? Why should Europe not help when they hear about people starving in cages? I guess US news doesn't bother with none US news so do yourself a favor and google the European immigration crisis and see that 'we' have our own problems with large immigration numbers and no one in Europe want a couple of extra thousand refugees just because the US is unable to provide food and a toothbrush. So when the US is putting people in cages and starving them, who should be the ones to help the people suffering? Have you considered not putting them in cages and starving them? Seriously, this isn't rocket science. Put a million people infront of the capital demanding better treatment rather then wonder if maybe you can fly em to the EU and dumb your shit in someone elses backyard. Who are you addressing? Me? Director of ice? Trump? I am a voter who voted and protests. I donate to organizations to make things better. I am politically active. I think you are fundamentally misunderstanding my thesis. I am saying since the US is the bad guy here, creating problems with our bad guy government, the good guys should save the day. We don't say "well North Korea, how about feed your people and stop building nukes?". Instead, we talk among ourselves how we can deal with bad actors. You are misunderstanding the situation if you see the US as potentially helpful in this situation. Well if the world wants to come together and sanction + Isolate the US then I'm all for that.
But your still completely ignore that the EU has immigration problems of its own and isn't interested in the US's concentration camp victims.
Instead of offering to shovel your shit onto someone else, consider how you can convince Republicans to pretend to be human beings or try and get the Democratic states to split from the Union (both are about as likely imo).
|
|
|
|