Things Many White People Seem To Not Understand

[Mudda]

Just to look at the first example "White Privilege is being able to move into a new neighborhood and being fairly sure that your neighbors will be pleasant to you and treat you with respect." So maybe if black people didn't fuck up most neighborhoods that they're in they'd get the same respect. Respect is earned.

Sure it is

‘This neighborhood does not need any blacks in it’: Racist letter shocks Kansas family

Because like I said, blacks fuck up most neighborhoods with their social bullshit. Maybe they should act more civilized first. Then respect will come.

 

[rightwinger]

Just to look at the first example "White Privilege is being able to move into a new neighborhood and being fairly sure that your neighbors will be pleasant to you and treat you with respect." So maybe if black people didn't fuck up most neighborhoods that they're in they'd get the same respect. Respect is earned.

Sure it is

‘This neighborhood does not need any blacks in it’: Racist letter shocks Kansas family

Because like I said, blacks fuck up most neighborhoods with their social bullshit. Maybe they should act more civilized first. Then respect will come.

Actually, it is racists who fuck up most neighborhoods

 

[Dogmaphobe]

U

I ask myself on a daily basis, "What do I have that I didn’t earn?"
-- Peggy MacIntosh​

1. White Privilege is being able to move into a new neighborhood and being fairly sure that your neighbors will be pleasant to you and treat you with respect.
   
2. White Privilege is being able to watch a movie, read a book and open the front page of a newspaper and assume that unless otherwise indicated, you and every white person whom you know or can imagine could well be the protagonist; you and your race is widely represented and spoken for. It's also being about to encounter any narrative about non-whites and empathetically dissociate yourself from it.
3. White Privilege is being able to seek legal, financial and medical help without having your race work against you.
4. White Privilege is living in a world where you are taught that people with your skin tone hold the standard for beauty.
5. White Privilege is never being told to, “get over slavery”.
6. White Privilege is having the prevalence and importance of the English language and finding amusement in ridiculing people of color/immigrants for their accents and their difficulty in speaking a language that is not their native tongue.
7. White Privilege is arrogantly believing that reverse racism actually exists and believing it is something other than racism.
8. White Privilege is being able to stay ignorant to the fact that racial slurs are part of a systematic dehumanization of entire groups of people who are and have historically been subjugated and hated just for being alive.
9. White Privilege is not having your name turned into an easier-to-say Anglo-Saxon name.
10. White Privilege is being able to fight racism one day, then ignore it the next.
11. White privilege is having your words and actions attributed to you as an individual, rather than have them reflect members of your race.
12. White Privilege is being able to talk about racism without appearing self-serving.
13. White Privilege is being able to be articulate and well-spoken without people being surprised.
14. White Privilege is being pulled over or taken aside and knowing that you are not being singled out because of your race/colour.
15. White Privilege is not having to teach your children to be aware of systematic racism for their own protection.
16. White Privilege is not having to acknowledge the fact that we live in a system that treats people of color unfairly politically, socially and economically and being able to choose, instead, -- if/when it suits you -- to believe that people of color are inherently less capable.
17. White Privilege is not having your people and their culture stereotyped and subsequently appropriated, romanticized or eroticized for the gain and pleasure of other white people.
18. White Privilege is being able to ignore the consequences of race.

Now, if as or after you read the list above, what crossed your mind was/were:

• ways to discredit the statement(s) rather than ways in which the statement(s) is so, and/or
• whether a statement is binarily applicable either in general or specifically,
• whether the inapplicability of one statement -- broadly or specifically -- to you or the white people whom you know has something to do with whether White Privilege exists,
• whether a single statement or the whole list sought to describe or label you specifically or white people in general rather than a body of cultural attitudes and experiences,

well, that's not white privilege, it's an outcome of White Privilege. What that is at least one of thee things -- white guilt, denial or racial bias -- but not knowing you personally, I can't say which. I suppose it could also be be incomprehension, but there's no "fancy" language there, so hopefully none of the literalists (or anyone else) here show us that they truly didn't get the substantive themes and contexts of the statements.

Lastly, to be clear, I didn't create the OP seeking to irk folks, truly. I want folks -- black and white -- to recognize that on a daily basis, whites enjoy a set of advantages and immunities that are a direct result of the oppression of people of color. I also want blacks to realize that often enough and unconsciously they feed the beast too and to that end, they aren't helping eradicate it. That's how deeply ingrained White Privilege is in American culture.

Interestingly, I didn't actually come to understand White Privilege until I discovered my own angst and apprehension when I spent a year living and traveling in places where there were no white people, or if there were I never saw them. And to be honest, it was some months later that I understood the emotions I'd felt . It was years later before the term "White Privilege" made its way to me and I came to have a tidy little label for what I'd experienced and discovered.

How you perceive the notion of that even being possible and indeed happening? Makes you squirm in your chair a bit and maybe feel a little uncomfortable, right? But here’s the thing – I’m not "on about" White Privilege to make you feel comfortable, that’s not my aim. I've created this thread to ideally erase the invisibility of the privileges you have that continue to help maintain white supremacy, yet I realize that's probably far too optimistic an objective. I’m trying merely to offer a few palpable illustrations of what White Privilege is in the hope that maybe one day, not necessarily one day soon, when you see it manifest, you'll recognize it for what it is and maybe even know that it's not fair that we enjoy a privilege no other Americans do, and in recognition of that, do something about ending it.


Additional Reading:

• THE ORIGINS OF “PRIVILEGE” -- An interview
  
• WHITE PRIVILEGE AND MALE PRIVILEGE: A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondences Through Work in Women's Studies
  
• UNDERSTANDING WHITE PRIVILEGE
  
• The Invisibility of White Privilege

I ask myself on a daily basis "why is 320 pages of tedium such an insufferable blowhard?"

....and to think that all you proved by your word vomit here is that reverse racism isn't just true, but true beyond any shadow of a doubt.

 

[ptbw forever]

BTW, if I post my argument at the last minute on Sunday, does that mean I automatically win because you can't post your refutation in time?

Red:
No. That you even asked that question is disconcerting on multiple levels, the first of which being that I'm not sure you actually understand what a dialectic argument is.

Organization of a Dialogic/Dialectic Paper

Unique Title
Intro Paragraphs:

Identify what assertion you will argue
Identify the 3-4 strongest opposing arguments,
Identify the argumentative structure you'll use, who precisely your intended audience is, and provide whatever other introductory details you feel readers in your target audience must have.​

Body

Body Section 1:

An argument and supporting details​

Body Section 2:

Its opposing argument and supporting details​

Body Section 3:

Rebuttal of the counter-argument and supporting details​

Conclusion:

1 - Summarize the key points in the body
2 - Where logically valid to do so, extrapolate to something beyond the literal findings/assertions presented in the body (optional)​

Bibliography

[FWIW, I don't care if you use MLA, APA, or hyperlinking]​

We are both delivering dialectic arguments not later than 8:30 this coming Sunday. I don't need to see yours in advance any more than you need to see mine because the "counter-argument" section of the overall argument must robustly and objectively present the opposing side's argument so that it can be rebutted in the "rebuttal" section. That is the reason for choosing the dialectic structure: it requires one to identify the strongest of the opposition's potential arguments and present them, well, as rigorously as one would present one's own position.

You stated that you would formulate your argument as a direct counter to mine, not in the context of a dialectic argument.

Okay...I understand why you said what you did. I will still deliver my argument by 8:30 p.m. on Sunday.

I don't need to see your argument before presenting my own. There are only so many thematically/substantively different arguments against the existence of white privilege. The strengths and weaknesses of each of them don't change simply because you or another author presents them; what changes by author is the qualitative nature of the presentation.

That makes no sense whatsoever in the context of this debate or any debate really.

Debates are supposed to be about the direct exchange of conflicting ideas and beliefs, not guessing or even strawmaning your opponent's arguments without any input from them.

Blue:
I'm interested in engaging you via the dialectic, thus I entreated for dialectical arguments. You can call that a debate if you want, and in some sense it is, but strictly speaking it is not.

Dialectic Vs Debate
The dialectical method is a method of obtaining truth. If history is written by the winners then it contains no truth as Alex Haley proves, in a society that has advanced in dialectical truth it would not matter who the winners are, history would be the same. The truth is not something to believe in as with the corruption of truth in religions, it is something that is. Pythagoras Theorem is a2 + b2 = c2. This example of truth was that way in the beginning of time and will still be that way at the end of time, it is not a belief, it is truth. The utilization of the movement of truth in religion is a magian attack on the movement where subjectives are perfected for innocent minds. Truth is new, priest based societies pre-date truth.

The dialectical method is dialogue between two or more people holding different points of view about a subject, who wish to establish the truth of the matter by dialogue, with reasoned arguments. Dialectics is different from debate, wherein the debaters are committed to their points of view, and mean to win the debate, either by persuading the opponent, proving their argument correct, or proving the opponent's argument incorrect — thus, either a judge or a jury must decide who wins the debate. Dialectics is also different from rhetoric, wherein the speaker uses logos, pathos, or ethos to persuade listeners to take their side of the argument.

Socrates favoured truth as the highest value, proposing that it could be discovered through reason and logic in discussion: ergo, dialectic. Socrates valued rationality (appealing to logic, not emotion) as the proper means for persuasion, the discovery of truth, and the determinant for one's actions. To Socrates, truth, not arête, was the greater good, and each person should, above all else, seek truth to guide one's life. Therefore, Socrates opposed the Sophists and their teaching of rhetoric as art and as emotional oratory requiring neither logic nor proof.

The purpose of the dialectic method of reasoning is resolution of disagreement through rational discussion, and, ultimately, the search for truth. One way to proceed — the Socratic method — is to show that a given hypothesis (with other admissions) leads to a contradiction; thus, forcing the withdrawal of the hypothesis as a candidate for truth (see reductio ad absurdum). Another dialectical resolution of disagreement is by denying a presupposition of the contending thesis and antithesis; thereby, proceeding to sublation (transcendance) to synthesis, a third thesis.

Dialectics (also called logic) was one of the three liberal arts taught in medieval universities as part of the trivium. The trivium also included rhetoric and grammar. Based mainly on Aristotle, the first medieval philosopher to work on dialectics was Boethius. After him, many scholastic philosophers also made use of dialectics in their works, such as Abelard, William of Sherwood, Garlandus Compotista, Walter Burley, Roger Swyneshed and William of Ockham.
​

You chose topic #1: White privilege exists. That statement must either be true or false. I proposed dialectic arguments because I care to discuss whether the assertion is true or not true. I don't care whether either of us can win a debate about whether it exists or doesn't. Why don't I care about winning a debate?

• Because if I win the debate and in truth it doesn't exist, what of any real value is gained by my winning?
• Because if you win the debate and in truth it does exist, what of any real value is gained?

Winning a debate is nice for the winner, but does nothing to advance the state of being of the parties to the discussion and it aids no observers in determining what is the truth, in this case, the greater or lesser likelihood that white privilege exists or does not exist. I have no interest in structuring a discussion so that winners and losers result. My aim in entreating you to a dialectic discussion is to create only winners: dialectic discourse allows everyone to come one step closer, maybe more steps closer, to knowing whether white privilege exists or does not exist. Nobody loses when that is the case.

I disagree with this wholeheartedly. Debates are the sole reason why we even have new, strong arguments to use in dialectic papers/arguments. Dialectic arguments are about assessing an individual's ability to research a topic and ultimately educate the individual doing the research on well established reality, it is not a tool to find new facts to establish more truth in any substantial way.

In a real debate(not the usual character execution ceremonies that are called "debates" these days), 2 individuals honestly looking for the truth bring their best and most well researched arguments ready and willing to withstand harsh criticism and iron out their philosophies to as close to perfection as they can get them(so honest debaters on both sides always win in a real sense by obtaining more knowledge). The very idea that people enter a debate in a honest fashion to "win" is a dangerous one to those truly seeking the truth, and I would certainly make the claim that anyone who can't be convinced by facts doesn't actually want to debate anyone or anything in the first place.

I guess where I am going with all of this is really that I just don't see how dual dialectic papers advances some new elements of truth, especially on a fairly obscure, low traffic political forum like this one; but I am hoping you can prove me wrong on that though.

 

[blastoff]

I ask myself on a daily basis, "What do I have that I didn’t earn?"
-- Peggy MacIntosh​

1. White Privilege is being able to move into a new neighborhood and being fairly sure that your neighbors will be pleasant to you and treat you with respect.
   
2. White Privilege is being able to watch a movie, read a book and open the front page of a newspaper and assume that unless otherwise indicated, you and every white person whom you know or can imagine could well be the protagonist; you and your race is widely represented and spoken for. It's also being about to encounter any narrative about non-whites and empathetically dissociate yourself from it.
3. White Privilege is being able to seek legal, financial and medical help without having your race work against you.
4. White Privilege is living in a world where you are taught that people with your skin tone hold the standard for beauty.
5. White Privilege is never being told to, “get over slavery”.
6. White Privilege is having the prevalence and importance of the English language and finding amusement in ridiculing people of color/immigrants for their accents and their difficulty in speaking a language that is not their native tongue.
7. White Privilege is arrogantly believing that reverse racism actually exists and believing it is something other than racism.
8. White Privilege is being able to stay ignorant to the fact that racial slurs are part of a systematic dehumanization of entire groups of people who are and have historically been subjugated and hated just for being alive.
9. White Privilege is not having your name turned into an easier-to-say Anglo-Saxon name.
10. White Privilege is being able to fight racism one day, then ignore it the next.
11. White privilege is having your words and actions attributed to you as an individual, rather than have them reflect members of your race.
12. White Privilege is being able to talk about racism without appearing self-serving.
13. White Privilege is being able to be articulate and well-spoken without people being surprised.
14. White Privilege is being pulled over or taken aside and knowing that you are not being singled out because of your race/colour.
15. White Privilege is not having to teach your children to be aware of systematic racism for their own protection.
16. White Privilege is not having to acknowledge the fact that we live in a system that treats people of color unfairly politically, socially and economically and being able to choose, instead, -- if/when it suits you -- to believe that people of color are inherently less capable.
17. White Privilege is not having your people and their culture stereotyped and subsequently appropriated, romanticized or eroticized for the gain and pleasure of other white people.
18. White Privilege is being able to ignore the consequences of race.

Now, if as or after you read the list above, what crossed your mind was/were:

• ways to discredit the statement(s) rather than ways in which the statement(s) is so, and/or
• whether a statement is binarily applicable either in general or specifically,
• whether the inapplicability of one statement -- broadly or specifically -- to you or the white people whom you know has something to do with whether White Privilege exists,
• whether a single statement or the whole list sought to describe or label you specifically or white people in general rather than a body of cultural attitudes and experiences,

well, that's not white privilege, it's an outcome of White Privilege. What that is at least one of thee things -- white guilt, denial or racial bias -- but not knowing you personally, I can't say which. I suppose it could also be be incomprehension, but there's no "fancy" language there, so hopefully none of the literalists (or anyone else) here show us that they truly didn't get the substantive themes and contexts of the statements.

Lastly, to be clear, I didn't create the OP seeking to irk folks, truly. I want folks -- black and white -- to recognize that on a daily basis, whites enjoy a set of advantages and immunities that are a direct result of the oppression of people of color. I also want blacks to realize that often enough and unconsciously they feed the beast too and to that end, they aren't helping eradicate it. That's how deeply ingrained White Privilege is in American culture.

Interestingly, I didn't actually come to understand White Privilege until I discovered my own angst and apprehension when I spent a year living and traveling in places where there were no white people, or if there were I never saw them. And to be honest, it was some months later that I understood the emotions I'd felt . It was years later before the term "White Privilege" made its way to me and I came to have a tidy little label for what I'd experienced and discovered.

How you perceive the notion of that even being possible and indeed happening? Makes you squirm in your chair a bit and maybe feel a little uncomfortable, right? But here’s the thing – I’m not "on about" White Privilege to make you feel comfortable, that’s not my aim. I've created this thread to ideally erase the invisibility of the privileges you have that continue to help maintain white supremacy, yet I realize that's probably far too optimistic an objective. I’m trying merely to offer a few palpable illustrations of what White Privilege is in the hope that maybe one day, not necessarily one day soon, when you see it manifest, you'll recognize it for what it is and maybe even know that it's not fair that we enjoy a privilege no other Americans do, and in recognition of that, do something about ending it.


Additional Reading:

• THE ORIGINS OF “PRIVILEGE” -- An interview
  
• WHITE PRIVILEGE AND MALE PRIVILEGE: A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondences Through Work in Women's Studies
  
• UNDERSTANDING WHITE PRIVILEGE
  
• The Invisibility of White Privilege

Dang, you almost made it to 20.

 

[ClosedCaption]

LOL...All the responses are just white people going "What bullshit" and then leaving with their privilege

 

[guno]

I ask myself on a daily basis, "What do I have that I didn’t earn?"
-- Peggy MacIntosh​

1. White Privilege is being able to move into a new neighborhood and being fairly sure that your neighbors will be pleasant to you and treat you with respect.
   
2. White Privilege is being able to watch a movie, read a book and open the front page of a newspaper and assume that unless otherwise indicated, you and every white person whom you know or can imagine could well be the protagonist; you and your race is widely represented and spoken for. It's also being about to encounter any narrative about non-whites and empathetically dissociate yourself from it.
3. White Privilege is being able to seek legal, financial and medical help without having your race work against you.
4. White Privilege is living in a world where you are taught that people with your skin tone hold the standard for beauty.
5. White Privilege is never being told to, “get over slavery”.
6. White Privilege is having the prevalence and importance of the English language and finding amusement in ridiculing people of color/immigrants for their accents and their difficulty in speaking a language that is not their native tongue.
7. White Privilege is arrogantly believing that reverse racism actually exists and believing it is something other than racism.
8. White Privilege is being able to stay ignorant to the fact that racial slurs are part of a systematic dehumanization of entire groups of people who are and have historically been subjugated and hated just for being alive.
9. White Privilege is not having your name turned into an easier-to-say Anglo-Saxon name.
10. White Privilege is being able to fight racism one day, then ignore it the next.
11. White privilege is having your words and actions attributed to you as an individual, rather than have them reflect members of your race.
12. White Privilege is being able to talk about racism without appearing self-serving.
13. White Privilege is being able to be articulate and well-spoken without people being surprised.
14. White Privilege is being pulled over or taken aside and knowing that you are not being singled out because of your race/colour.
15. White Privilege is not having to teach your children to be aware of systematic racism for their own protection.
16. White Privilege is not having to acknowledge the fact that we live in a system that treats people of color unfairly politically, socially and economically and being able to choose, instead, -- if/when it suits you -- to believe that people of color are inherently less capable.
17. White Privilege is not having your people and their culture stereotyped and subsequently appropriated, romanticized or eroticized for the gain and pleasure of other white people.
18. White Privilege is being able to ignore the consequences of race.

Now, if as or after you read the list above, what crossed your mind was/were:

• ways to discredit the statement(s) rather than ways in which the statement(s) is so, and/or
• whether a statement is binarily applicable either in general or specifically,
• whether the inapplicability of one statement -- broadly or specifically -- to you or the white people whom you know has something to do with whether White Privilege exists,
• whether a single statement or the whole list sought to describe or label you specifically or white people in general rather than a body of cultural attitudes and experiences,

well, that's not white privilege, it's an outcome of White Privilege. What that is at least one of thee things -- white guilt, denial or racial bias -- but not knowing you personally, I can't say which. I suppose it could also be be incomprehension, but there's no "fancy" language there, so hopefully none of the literalists (or anyone else) here show us that they truly didn't get the substantive themes and contexts of the statements.

Lastly, to be clear, I didn't create the OP seeking to irk folks, truly. I want folks -- black and white -- to recognize that on a daily basis, whites enjoy a set of advantages and immunities that are a direct result of the oppression of people of color. I also want blacks to realize that often enough and unconsciously they feed the beast too and to that end, they aren't helping eradicate it. That's how deeply ingrained White Privilege is in American culture.

Interestingly, I didn't actually come to understand White Privilege until I discovered my own angst and apprehension when I spent a year living and traveling in places where there were no white people, or if there were I never saw them. And to be honest, it was some months later that I understood the emotions I'd felt . It was years later before the term "White Privilege" made its way to me and I came to have a tidy little label for what I'd experienced and discovered.

How you perceive the notion of that even being possible and indeed happening? Makes you squirm in your chair a bit and maybe feel a little uncomfortable, right? But here’s the thing – I’m not "on about" White Privilege to make you feel comfortable, that’s not my aim. I've created this thread to ideally erase the invisibility of the privileges you have that continue to help maintain white supremacy, yet I realize that's probably far too optimistic an objective. I’m trying merely to offer a few palpable illustrations of what White Privilege is in the hope that maybe one day, not necessarily one day soon, when you see it manifest, you'll recognize it for what it is and maybe even know that it's not fair that we enjoy a privilege no other Americans do, and in recognition of that, do something about ending it.


Additional Reading:

• THE ORIGINS OF “PRIVILEGE” -- An interview
  
• WHITE PRIVILEGE AND MALE PRIVILEGE: A Personal Account of Coming to See Correspondences Through Work in Women's Studies
  
• UNDERSTANDING WHITE PRIVILEGE
  
• The Invisibility of White Privilege

And it's all coming to an end

 

[ptbw forever]

[white privilege] is, at the very least, a western encompassing one that is lodged at any white person

Why do you conclude that one's assertion that white privilege exists and then describing the ways in which it is manifest is necessarily an attack? Consider for instance comparable assertions:

• In Israel, Jewish privilege exists.
• In Saudi Arabia, Muslim privilege exists.
• In China, Han privilege exists.

If one were to say that to the natives of those places, almost without exception, one would get as a reply something akin to, "Yes, it does." Indeed, I had precisely that conversation with eight of my Chinese colleagues in 2009. All but two, Uyghurs, who where present are Han. None of them denied the existence of Han privilege in China. No Hans felt threatened or "lodged upon." They just know it's something that does exist and they happen to be the beneficiaries of it.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited. "White privilege" is also seen as an attack because of the fact there is no equivalent term in the modern lexicon for the privilege of other ethnic, religious or racial groups.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Just to look at the first example "White Privilege is being able to move into a new neighborhood and being fairly sure that your neighbors will be pleasant to you and treat you with respect." So maybe if black people didn't fuck up most neighborhoods that they're in they'd get the same respect. Respect is earned.

Sure it is

‘This neighborhood does not need any blacks in it’: Racist letter shocks Kansas family

Because like I said, blacks fuck up most neighborhoods with their social bullshit. Maybe they should act more civilized first. Then respect will come.

Actually, it is racists who fuck up most neighborhoods

Well, that explains my peacefully diverse neighborhood. There are no Democrats in sight.

 

[OldLady]

[white privilege] is, at the very least, a western encompassing one that is lodged at any white person

Why do you conclude that one's assertion that white privilege exists and then describing the ways in which it is manifest is necessarily an attack? Consider for instance comparable assertions:

• In Israel, Jewish privilege exists.
• In Saudi Arabia, Muslim privilege exists.
• In China, Han privilege exists.

If one were to say that to the natives of those places, almost without exception, one would get as a reply something akin to, "Yes, it does." Indeed, I had precisely that conversation with eight of my Chinese colleagues in 2009. All but two, Uyghurs, who where present are Han. None of them denied the existence of Han privilege in China. No Hans felt threatened or "lodged upon." They just know it's something that does exist and they happen to be the beneficiaries of it.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited. "White privilege" is also seen as an attack because of the fact there is no equivalent term in the modern lexicon for the privilege of other ethnic, religious or racial groups.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited.
Can you give some examples of what you mean? I'm honestly curious why so many posters here accuse me of being "racist" because I recognize racism when I see it.
Confuses me.

 

[320 Years of History]

[white privilege] is, at the very least, a western encompassing one that is lodged at any white person

Why do you conclude that one's assertion that white privilege exists and then describing the ways in which it is manifest is necessarily an attack? Consider for instance comparable assertions:

• In Israel, Jewish privilege exists.
• In Saudi Arabia, Muslim privilege exists.
• In China, Han privilege exists.

If one were to say that to the natives of those places, almost without exception, one would get as a reply something akin to, "Yes, it does." Indeed, I had precisely that conversation with eight of my Chinese colleagues in 2009. All but two, Uyghurs, who where present are Han. None of them denied the existence of Han privilege in China. No Hans felt threatened or "lodged upon." They just know it's something that does exist and they happen to be the beneficiaries of it.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited. "White privilege" is also seen as an attack because of the fact there is no equivalent term in the modern lexicon for the privilege of other ethnic, religious or racial groups.

Red:
There is in "the modern lexicon" a comparable term for the privilege of at least one other ethnic/racial group. I told you want it is in simple English, but if you prefer, here's the literal and original term: 大汉族主义 or in pinyin, dà Hànzú zhǔyia. Chairman Mao coined the term in the 1950s.

• On Uighurs, Han, and general racial attitudes in China
  
• Weekend Xinjiang / Uighur / 愤青 update, #2
  
• Singapore isn’t the global city of the future after all
  
• Chinese Privilege, Gender and Intersectionality in Singapore: A Conversation between Adeline Koh and Sangeetha Thanapal | boundary 2
  
• Could Han Chauvinism Turn the 'Chinese Dream' into a 'Chinese Nightmare'?

The bias of the Han is not limited to how Uyghurs are viewed and treated in Chinese society; however, there's no reason for the more "in your face" signs of Chinese chauvinism to make it onto American television.

​

Sure as that ad exists, and Chinese folks see it a "humorously cute," the black folks on my projects in China report that actual bias isn't something they've felt or encountered. Rather, they note that in their experience, Chinese people are quite welcoming of them. (Yes, in case you're wondering, the blacks on my project teams in China read and write Mandarin. I'm the one who can't read and write Mandarin/Simplified Chinese.)

As I told you there is Jewish Privilege in Israel. There is even white Jewish Privilege there.

• Jews and Racial Privilege
  
• http://forward.com/opinion/337152/h...lege-when-most-citizens-believe-they-deserve/
  
• Using My Jewish Privilege To Make a Difference for Palestinians in Hebron
  
• Lawsuit challenges Israel’s discriminatory citizenship definition

That you may not be aware of the term "dà Hànzú zhǔyia" is indicative of nothing having to do with the phenomenon of dà Hànzú zhǔyia. Believe it or not, there is more that goes on in the world than what falls right in front of you, but if you go looking for them, you'll find them. (See my signature line.)


I told you before that there is and you unilaterally declared that I was being disingenuous. You cited two reasons why you think that:

• because, in your opinion, Peggy McIntosh doesn't believe in it --> What Peggy believes in or doesn't believe in has nothing to do with what exists or does not exist. Peggy can believe in the Tooth Fairy, but that won't make the Tooth Fairy exist. Peggy can disbelieve in bananas, but bananas will still exist.
• because "white privilege is not even close to being as influential to American or Western European power structures as the Han are to China's." --> How influential the phenomenon is and what its effects are have nothing to do with whether it exists or not.

 

[ptbw forever]

LOL...All the responses are just white people going "What bullshit" and then leaving with their privilege

Mine are much much more substantive than that.

 

[ptbw forever]

[white privilege] is, at the very least, a western encompassing one that is lodged at any white person

Why do you conclude that one's assertion that white privilege exists and then describing the ways in which it is manifest is necessarily an attack? Consider for instance comparable assertions:

• In Israel, Jewish privilege exists.
• In Saudi Arabia, Muslim privilege exists.
• In China, Han privilege exists.

If one were to say that to the natives of those places, almost without exception, one would get as a reply something akin to, "Yes, it does." Indeed, I had precisely that conversation with eight of my Chinese colleagues in 2009. All but two, Uyghurs, who where present are Han. None of them denied the existence of Han privilege in China. No Hans felt threatened or "lodged upon." They just know it's something that does exist and they happen to be the beneficiaries of it.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited. "White privilege" is also seen as an attack because of the fact there is no equivalent term in the modern lexicon for the privilege of other ethnic, religious or racial groups.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited.
Can you give some examples of what you mean? I'm honestly curious why so many posters here accuse me of being "racist" because I recognize racism when I see it.
Confuses me.

I mean that you literally can't make a group that pertains to all or mostly white people without a lawsuit being filed that is sanctioned by all levels of the government and the media. The outrageous portrayal of the Tea Party as some sort of offshoot of the KKK just because it was something like almost 90% white shows this quite clearly.

The belief that the contemporary left and Democrats have that any large gathering of white people can turn into a klan rally is not just a wrong and paranoid one, it is quite a bigoted and racist one that goes to the very core of post WW2 western society. White people are basically guilty until proven innocent in any situation that currently pertains to race.

I think the problem you have is that you refuse to see the racism against white people coming from your own peers and political party.

 

[OldLady]

[white privilege] is, at the very least, a western encompassing one that is lodged at any white person

Why do you conclude that one's assertion that white privilege exists and then describing the ways in which it is manifest is necessarily an attack? Consider for instance comparable assertions:

• In Israel, Jewish privilege exists.
• In Saudi Arabia, Muslim privilege exists.
• In China, Han privilege exists.

If one were to say that to the natives of those places, almost without exception, one would get as a reply something akin to, "Yes, it does." Indeed, I had precisely that conversation with eight of my Chinese colleagues in 2009. All but two, Uyghurs, who where present are Han. None of them denied the existence of Han privilege in China. No Hans felt threatened or "lodged upon." They just know it's something that does exist and they happen to be the beneficiaries of it.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited. "White privilege" is also seen as an attack because of the fact there is no equivalent term in the modern lexicon for the privilege of other ethnic, religious or racial groups.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited.
Can you give some examples of what you mean? I'm honestly curious why so many posters here accuse me of being "racist" because I recognize racism when I see it.
Confuses me.

I mean that you literally can't make a group that pertains to all or mostly white people without a lawsuit being filed that is sanctioned by all levels of the government and the media. The outrageous portrayal of the Tea Party as some sort of offshoot of the KKK just because it was something like almost 90% white shows this quite clearly.

The belief that the contemporary left and Democrats have that any large gathering of white people can turn into a klan rally is not just a wrong and paranoid one, it is quite a bigoted and racist one that goes to the very core of post WW2 western society. White people are basically guilty until proven innocent in any situation that currently pertains to race.

I think the problem you have is that you refuse to see the racism against white people coming from your own peers and political party.

Thanks for trying, but all I'm hearing is defensiveness about ... Klan rallies? Sounds like a really, really deep dive for a reason to call Dems racists (although I would like to point out, I am not a Dem).

 

[ptbw forever]

[white privilege] is, at the very least, a western encompassing one that is lodged at any white person

Why do you conclude that one's assertion that white privilege exists and then describing the ways in which it is manifest is necessarily an attack? Consider for instance comparable assertions:

• In Israel, Jewish privilege exists.
• In Saudi Arabia, Muslim privilege exists.
• In China, Han privilege exists.

If one were to say that to the natives of those places, almost without exception, one would get as a reply something akin to, "Yes, it does." Indeed, I had precisely that conversation with eight of my Chinese colleagues in 2009. All but two, Uyghurs, who where present are Han. None of them denied the existence of Han privilege in China. No Hans felt threatened or "lodged upon." They just know it's something that does exist and they happen to be the beneficiaries of it.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited. "White privilege" is also seen as an attack because of the fact there is no equivalent term in the modern lexicon for the privilege of other ethnic, religious or racial groups.

Red:
There is in "the modern lexicon" a comparable term for the privilege of at least one other ethnic/racial group. I told you want it is in simple English, but if you prefer, here's the literal and original term: 大汉族主义 or in pinyin, dà Hànzú zhǔyia. Chairman Mao coined the term in the 1950s.

• On Uighurs, Han, and general racial attitudes in China
  
• Weekend Xinjiang / Uighur / 愤青 update, #2
  
• Singapore isn’t the global city of the future after all
  
• Chinese Privilege, Gender and Intersectionality in Singapore: A Conversation between Adeline Koh and Sangeetha Thanapal | boundary 2
  
• Could Han Chauvinism Turn the 'Chinese Dream' into a 'Chinese Nightmare'?

The bias of the Han is not limited to how Uyghurs are viewed and treated in Chinese society; however, there's no reason for the more "in your face" signs of Chinese chauvinism to make it onto American television.

​

Sure as that ad exists, and Chinese folks see it a "humorously cute," the black folks on my projects in China report that actual bias isn't something they've felt or encountered. Rather, they note that in their experience, Chinese people are quite welcoming of them. (Yes, in case you're wondering, the blacks on my project teams in China read and write Mandarin. I'm the one who can't read and write Mandarin/Simplified Chinese.)

As I told you there is Jewish Privilege in Israel. There is even white Jewish Privilege there.

• Jews and Racial Privilege
  
• http://forward.com/opinion/337152/h...lege-when-most-citizens-believe-they-deserve/
  
• Using My Jewish Privilege To Make a Difference for Palestinians in Hebron
  
• Lawsuit challenges Israel’s discriminatory citizenship definition

That you may not be aware of the term "dà Hànzú zhǔyia" is indicative of nothing having to do with the phenomenon of dà Hànzú zhǔyia. Believe it or not, there is more that goes on in the world than what falls right in front of you, but if you go looking for them, you'll find them. (See my signature line.)


I told you before that there is and you unilaterally declared that I was being disingenuous. You cited two reasons why you think that:

• because, in your opinion, Peggy McIntosh doesn't believe in it --> What Peggy believes in or doesn't believe in has nothing to do with what exists or does not exist. Peggy can believe in the Tooth Fairy, but that won't make the Tooth Fairy exist. Peggy can disbelieve in bananas, but bananas will still exist.
• because "white privilege is not even close to being as influential to American or Western European power structures as the Han are to China's." --> How influential the phenomenon is and what its effects are have nothing to do with whether it exists or not.

Once again you are being disingenuous, this time by comparing the reactions of the Chinese to a comparitively microscopic minority in China(black people) to the reactions of westerners to minorities who are literally becoming the majority at an ever quickening pace.

BTW, is there non-Italian/non-white/black privilege in Italy because of this commercial(the original to the one you posted btw)?:



Commercials like this actually illustrate the need for a debate on the existence of white privilege, because this commercial clearly suggests otherwise in a country that is much whiter than the US.

Even if one were to concede that white privilege existed in the past, the world is vastly different now and clearly the old arguments presented by Peggy and Jane are largely irrelevant or reversed now.

 

[ptbw forever]

[white privilege] is, at the very least, a western encompassing one that is lodged at any white person

Why do you conclude that one's assertion that white privilege exists and then describing the ways in which it is manifest is necessarily an attack? Consider for instance comparable assertions:

• In Israel, Jewish privilege exists.
• In Saudi Arabia, Muslim privilege exists.
• In China, Han privilege exists.

If one were to say that to the natives of those places, almost without exception, one would get as a reply something akin to, "Yes, it does." Indeed, I had precisely that conversation with eight of my Chinese colleagues in 2009. All but two, Uyghurs, who where present are Han. None of them denied the existence of Han privilege in China. No Hans felt threatened or "lodged upon." They just know it's something that does exist and they happen to be the beneficiaries of it.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited. "White privilege" is also seen as an attack because of the fact there is no equivalent term in the modern lexicon for the privilege of other ethnic, religious or racial groups.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited.
Can you give some examples of what you mean? I'm honestly curious why so many posters here accuse me of being "racist" because I recognize racism when I see it.
Confuses me.

I mean that you literally can't make a group that pertains to all or mostly white people without a lawsuit being filed that is sanctioned by all levels of the government and the media. The outrageous portrayal of the Tea Party as some sort of offshoot of the KKK just because it was something like almost 90% white shows this quite clearly.

The belief that the contemporary left and Democrats have that any large gathering of white people can turn into a klan rally is not just a wrong and paranoid one, it is quite a bigoted and racist one that goes to the very core of post WW2 western society. White people are basically guilty until proven innocent in any situation that currently pertains to race.

I think the problem you have is that you refuse to see the racism against white people coming from your own peers and political party.

Thanks for trying, but all I'm hearing is defensiveness about ... Klan rallies? Sounds like a really, really deep dive for a reason to call Dems racists (although I would like to point out, I am not a Dem).

You clearly hear what you want to hear and don't have the foggiest clue what racism is.

 

[OldLady]

Why do you conclude that one's assertion that white privilege exists and then describing the ways in which it is manifest is necessarily an attack? Consider for instance comparable assertions:

• In Israel, Jewish privilege exists.
• In Saudi Arabia, Muslim privilege exists.
• In China, Han privilege exists.

If one were to say that to the natives of those places, almost without exception, one would get as a reply something akin to, "Yes, it does." Indeed, I had precisely that conversation with eight of my Chinese colleagues in 2009. All but two, Uyghurs, who where present are Han. None of them denied the existence of Han privilege in China. No Hans felt threatened or "lodged upon." They just know it's something that does exist and they happen to be the beneficiaries of it.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited. "White privilege" is also seen as an attack because of the fact there is no equivalent term in the modern lexicon for the privilege of other ethnic, religious or racial groups.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited.
Can you give some examples of what you mean? I'm honestly curious why so many posters here accuse me of being "racist" because I recognize racism when I see it.
Confuses me.

I mean that you literally can't make a group that pertains to all or mostly white people without a lawsuit being filed that is sanctioned by all levels of the government and the media. The outrageous portrayal of the Tea Party as some sort of offshoot of the KKK just because it was something like almost 90% white shows this quite clearly.

The belief that the contemporary left and Democrats have that any large gathering of white people can turn into a klan rally is not just a wrong and paranoid one, it is quite a bigoted and racist one that goes to the very core of post WW2 western society. White people are basically guilty until proven innocent in any situation that currently pertains to race.

I think the problem you have is that you refuse to see the racism against white people coming from your own peers and political party.

Thanks for trying, but all I'm hearing is defensiveness about ... Klan rallies? Sounds like a really, really deep dive for a reason to call Dems racists (although I would like to point out, I am not a Dem).

You clearly hear what you want to hear and don't have the foggiest clue what racism is.

If you feel as if the world is picking on you, maybe it's because you're a white supremacist.

 

[320 Years of History]

[white privilege] is, at the very least, a western encompassing one that is lodged at any white person

Why do you conclude that one's assertion that white privilege exists and then describing the ways in which it is manifest is necessarily an attack? Consider for instance comparable assertions:

• In Israel, Jewish privilege exists.
• In Saudi Arabia, Muslim privilege exists.
• In China, Han privilege exists.

If one were to say that to the natives of those places, almost without exception, one would get as a reply something akin to, "Yes, it does." Indeed, I had precisely that conversation with eight of my Chinese colleagues in 2009. All but two, Uyghurs, who where present are Han. None of them denied the existence of Han privilege in China. No Hans felt threatened or "lodged upon." They just know it's something that does exist and they happen to be the beneficiaries of it.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited. "White privilege" is also seen as an attack because of the fact there is no equivalent term in the modern lexicon for the privilege of other ethnic, religious or racial groups.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited.
Can you give some examples of what you mean? I'm honestly curious why so many posters here accuse me of being "racist" because I recognize racism when I see it.
Confuses me.

I mean that you literally can't make a group that pertains to all or mostly white people without a lawsuit being filed that is sanctioned by all levels of the government and the media. The outrageous portrayal of the Tea Party as some sort of offshoot of the KKK just because it was something like almost 90% white shows this quite clearly.

The belief that the contemporary left and Democrats have that any large gathering of white people can turn into a klan rally is not just a wrong and paranoid one, it is quite a bigoted and racist one that goes to the very core of post WW2 western society. White people are basically guilty until proven innocent in any situation that currently pertains to race.

I think the problem you have is that you refuse to see the racism against white people coming from your own peers and political party.

Thanks for trying, but all I'm hearing is defensiveness about ... Klan rallies? Sounds like a really, really deep dive for a reason to call Dems racists (although I would like to point out, I am not a Dem).

Of course that's all you heard. How could you not? The entire reply depended on who makes what points, not on the cogency of the points that anyone made. Abstract analysis did not rear its head in the development of the resonse you received.

 

[Billy_Kinetta]

Commercials like this actually illustrate the need for a debate on the existence of white privilege, because this commercial clearly suggests otherwise in a country that is much whiter than the US.

Even if one were to concede that white privilege existed in the past, the world is vastly different now and clearly the old arguments presented by Peggy and Jane are largely irrelevant or reversed now.

What a fabulous commercial.

 

[ptbw forever]

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited. "White privilege" is also seen as an attack because of the fact there is no equivalent term in the modern lexicon for the privilege of other ethnic, religious or racial groups.

I and many others view it as an attack because it further discourages group activity in communities that are already hyper-individualized to the point that group needs are neglected, or even harshly discouraged or prohibited.
Can you give some examples of what you mean? I'm honestly curious why so many posters here accuse me of being "racist" because I recognize racism when I see it.
Confuses me.

I mean that you literally can't make a group that pertains to all or mostly white people without a lawsuit being filed that is sanctioned by all levels of the government and the media. The outrageous portrayal of the Tea Party as some sort of offshoot of the KKK just because it was something like almost 90% white shows this quite clearly.

The belief that the contemporary left and Democrats have that any large gathering of white people can turn into a klan rally is not just a wrong and paranoid one, it is quite a bigoted and racist one that goes to the very core of post WW2 western society. White people are basically guilty until proven innocent in any situation that currently pertains to race.

I think the problem you have is that you refuse to see the racism against white people coming from your own peers and political party.

Thanks for trying, but all I'm hearing is defensiveness about ... Klan rallies? Sounds like a really, really deep dive for a reason to call Dems racists (although I would like to point out, I am not a Dem).

You clearly hear what you want to hear and don't have the foggiest clue what racism is.

If you feel as if the world is picking on you, maybe it's because you're a white supremacist.

Or maybe the world is racist against white people and they can get away with it due to white people being a tiny minority.

I know that is above and beyond your level of comprehension, but you could at least try to educate yourself about the world.