Debate Now White Privilege and an Institution of Racism

[Foxfyre]

White privilege certainly exists - and should be encouraged/preserved for future generations of Whites in countries and territories where Whites are the demographic majority - due to instincts buried in our subconscious; but its conceptualisation has mainly been used as a means of polarising and aggitating the masses to sell headlines.

I can't really agree with that Swagger, though I do believe us white people should be no more ashamed to be white than persons of other races should be ashamed of being born who and what they are.

But until we start treating skin color as of no more consequence than hair color or eye color, I am afraid the white race will continue to be demonized by racist opportunists and racism will remain alive and well because it is so easily used for fun and profit and political advantage.

Lets go back to the above statement. I would like to know what you meant by it.

What must we do to kill racism?

IMO, we will never kill racism because it has existed since races have existed. But we can make it of no more importance than prejudice against fat people or old people or accordian players just by refusing to cater to it. We deep six all forms of political correctness, restore good manners, and start treating all people like everybody else. Skin color becomes of no more importance that eye color or hair color.

Morgan Freeman touched on that concept here and I do believe that is what McWhorter was aiming for with his essay:

 

[Foxfyre]

White privilege certainly exists - and should be encouraged/preserved for future generations of Whites in countries and territories where Whites are the demographic majority - due to instincts buried in our subconscious; but its conceptualisation has mainly been used as a means of polarising and aggitating the masses to sell headlines.

I can't really agree with that Swagger, though I do believe us white people should be no more ashamed to be white than persons of other races should be ashamed of being born who and what they are.

But until we start treating skin color as of no more consequence than hair color or eye color, I am afraid the white race will continue to be demonized by racist opportunists and racism will remain alive and well because it is so easily used for fun and profit and political advantage.

Lets go back to the above statement. I would like to know what you meant by it.

What must we do to kill racism?

Kill all white people and black people, or control everyone's ability to have free thoughts.

Sounds like the goals of eugenicists and authoritarians.


Live in an Utopian world view much?


Seriously, it's pretty simple.

As long as politicians and elites who control the media find a benefit in controlling the masses by creating divisions and hatred in order to get elected and steer attention away from important matters, the blame game and bigotry will continue.

Re your comment that I bolded, I do believe that is what McWhorter was getting at with his essay. And that sentence up there that Derideo_te objected to regarding expectations of white people to embrace white guilt goes to the heart of it. And it is summed up in his question of who benefits?

 

[Derideo_Te]

. . .If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys.

Please note that the above is a direct quote from McWhorter's essay as provided in the OP and is addressed below.

That statement by McWhorter is a fallacy and it exposes the absurdity of the arguments made by racists to support their racism.

The questions in the poll are equally fallacious and absurd because they the same arguments made by racists to support their racism.

Speaking from personal experience only I have noticed that most racists are blind to their own racism. They don't understand that what they say and do is racist. It is also readily apparent to me that racists are incapable of learning from their mistakes.

Since I abhor all forms of racism I call it out when I encounter it. I don't expect that calling it out will change the racists but it will alert others to the racists in our midst.

This thread is an attempt to justify racism IMO given what is quoted in the OP so my position is neither yes or no because that would lend credence to the topic.

Racism in all of it's forms is wrong and I see a better future where the generations to come are colorblind to race and treat each other based on their behavior and not their appearance.

Disclaimer: I support the right of the OP to raise this topic in this forum and I am not implying that the OP is a racist either. Instead I am just exercising my right to express my opinion of the subject matter provided in the OP.

McWhorter's statement sure did resonate with me as I have been told that very thing, at least by implication, here at USMB and elsewhere. So I don't see it as a fallacy at all.

And perhaps Derideo_Te could clarify a bit how the rest of his comments relate to the thread topic or answer the question presented as the thread topic?

Far from "resonating with me" I had the exact opposite reaction. I was appalled by the veiled racist implications.

My comments stand by themselves. MacWhorter is trying to excuse racism and blame the victims IMO. I called that out.

Veiled racist implications? There was nothing veiled about it. McWhorter's entire essay is on the subject of racism. And I don't see how anybody can read McWhorter's essay or the few paragraphs I excerpted from it to highlight in the OP, and conclude that he is in any way excusing racism. Not even if you take the one line you excerpted and omit the two paragraphs following it that expand on his intent with that line.

Did you read the essay?

Could you explain how his statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" in any way excuses racism? And on what basis do you call it a fallacy?

Remember his essay was inspired by a mandatory requirement to attend "White Privilege 101" classes as explained in his essay.

My take from his thesis is that this kind of thing only perpetuates racism and is not helping. That conclusion is in fact somewhat veiled, but is obvious I think to somebody who reads what he wrote as he intended for it to be understood.

Please allow me to clarify my post since it is apparent that it needs clarification.

The OP provided this poll;

That was followed by MacWhorter's statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" .

Those loaded and biased questions followed by what you extracted from MacWhorter's essay set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO.

That might not have been your intention but that is how it comes across so I called that out. I explicitly stated my position as being opposed to racism in all of it's forms.

Which brings us to these questions.

Are the questions in your poll helping or hurting black people?

Does this thread help or hurt black people by questioning the focus on white privilege?

Reinforcing negative stereotypes by posing loaded and biased questions is what I am seeing in the OP.

 

[MisterBeale]

White privilege certainly exists - and should be encouraged/preserved for future generations of Whites in countries and territories where Whites are the demographic majority - due to instincts buried in our subconscious; but its conceptualisation has mainly been used as a means of polarising and aggitating the masses to sell headlines.

I can't really agree with that Swagger, though I do believe us white people should be no more ashamed to be white than persons of other races should be ashamed of being born who and what they are.

But until we start treating skin color as of no more consequence than hair color or eye color, I am afraid the white race will continue to be demonized by racist opportunists and racism will remain alive and well because it is so easily used for fun and profit and political advantage.

Lets go back to the above statement. I would like to know what you meant by it.

What must we do to kill racism?

Kill all white people and black people, or control everyone's ability to have free thoughts.

Sounds like the goals of eugenicists and authoritarians.


Live in an Utopian world view much?


Seriously, it's pretty simple.

As long as politicians and elites who control the media find a benefit in controlling the masses by creating divisions and hatred in order to get elected and steer attention away from important matters, the blame game and bigotry will continue.

Bull. You find racism and bigotry in people who do not vote, don't pay attention to politics and couldn't name the three branches of the US government if a gun was at their head.

You and I both pay attention....and..... therefore are being controlled by the media? I'd say that both you and I are aware of what the "important matters" are. Are you a bigot as a result? I'm not.

As long as racism exists in the masses, as mass influential movements, IT WILL affect the voting.

If you seriously don't believe that, then you don't know shit about the last presidential election, and you don't know anything about electoral politics.



Here you are arguing about race and racism as a problem that needs to be addressed, yet, you haven't gotten the entire point of the thread. If we just start treating everyone the same, and quit making such a big deal out of it, it will not breed division and resentment. The solution is here and now. You just don't want to accept it.

 

[Foxfyre]

. . .If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys.

Please note that the above is a direct quote from McWhorter's essay as provided in the OP and is addressed below.

That statement by McWhorter is a fallacy and it exposes the absurdity of the arguments made by racists to support their racism.

The questions in the poll are equally fallacious and absurd because they the same arguments made by racists to support their racism.

Speaking from personal experience only I have noticed that most racists are blind to their own racism. They don't understand that what they say and do is racist. It is also readily apparent to me that racists are incapable of learning from their mistakes.

Since I abhor all forms of racism I call it out when I encounter it. I don't expect that calling it out will change the racists but it will alert others to the racists in our midst.

This thread is an attempt to justify racism IMO given what is quoted in the OP so my position is neither yes or no because that would lend credence to the topic.

Racism in all of it's forms is wrong and I see a better future where the generations to come are colorblind to race and treat each other based on their behavior and not their appearance.

Disclaimer: I support the right of the OP to raise this topic in this forum and I am not implying that the OP is a racist either. Instead I am just exercising my right to express my opinion of the subject matter provided in the OP.

McWhorter's statement sure did resonate with me as I have been told that very thing, at least by implication, here at USMB and elsewhere. So I don't see it as a fallacy at all.

And perhaps Derideo_Te could clarify a bit how the rest of his comments relate to the thread topic or answer the question presented as the thread topic?

Far from "resonating with me" I had the exact opposite reaction. I was appalled by the veiled racist implications.

My comments stand by themselves. MacWhorter is trying to excuse racism and blame the victims IMO. I called that out.

Veiled racist implications? There was nothing veiled about it. McWhorter's entire essay is on the subject of racism. And I don't see how anybody can read McWhorter's essay or the few paragraphs I excerpted from it to highlight in the OP, and conclude that he is in any way excusing racism. Not even if you take the one line you excerpted and omit the two paragraphs following it that expand on his intent with that line.

Did you read the essay?

Could you explain how his statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" in any way excuses racism? And on what basis do you call it a fallacy?

Remember his essay was inspired by a mandatory requirement to attend "White Privilege 101" classes as explained in his essay.

My take from his thesis is that this kind of thing only perpetuates racism and is not helping. That conclusion is in fact somewhat veiled, but is obvious I think to somebody who reads what he wrote as he intended for it to be understood.

Please allow me to clarify my post since it is apparent that it needs clarification.

The OP provided this poll;

View attachment 37949

That was followed by MacWhorter's statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" .

Those loaded and biased questions followed by what you extracted from MacWhorter's essay set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO.

That might not have been your intention but that is how it comes across so I called that out. I explicitly stated my position as being opposed to racism in all of it's forms.

Which brings us to these questions.

Are the questions in your poll helping or hurting black people?

Does this thread help or hurt black people by questioning the focus on white privilege?

Reinforcing negative stereotypes by posing loaded and biased questions is what I am seeing in the OP.

The poll questions are based on attitudes you see expressed on every thread on racism on every message board everywhere, expressed by talking heads demanding politically correct attitudes, expressed by race baiters and those who personally profit from race baiting. And if you don't like any one of them--if it does not express your point of view--you do not check that option. Loaded and biased? Not when there is a choice to agree or not.

And IMO what you concluded was an OP that "set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO." is really a very glaringly incorrect interpretation of what McWhorter was saying.

Do the questions in the poll help or hurt black people? Neither as neither was my purpose for posting them. They are intended to focus those who are interested on what their attitudes about racism really are as that is exactly what McWhorter's essay was all about.
Is the thesis of the OP intended to help or hurt black people? Neither. It is my effort to have an honest discussion about racism--both means by which it is socially perpetuated by those pretending they are trying to combat it and the unintended consequences of those efforts to combat it.

These things have to be part of the discussion or there is only angry noise and we continue to hurt people, all people, because we are unaware of or refuse to admit the real results of what we do.

McWhorter's essay was brilliant and provided a vehicle to do that in a focused manner.

 

[Derideo_Te]

Please note that the above is a direct quote from McWhorter's essay as provided in the OP and is addressed below.

That statement by McWhorter is a fallacy and it exposes the absurdity of the arguments made by racists to support their racism.

The questions in the poll are equally fallacious and absurd because they the same arguments made by racists to support their racism.

Speaking from personal experience only I have noticed that most racists are blind to their own racism. They don't understand that what they say and do is racist. It is also readily apparent to me that racists are incapable of learning from their mistakes.

Since I abhor all forms of racism I call it out when I encounter it. I don't expect that calling it out will change the racists but it will alert others to the racists in our midst.

This thread is an attempt to justify racism IMO given what is quoted in the OP so my position is neither yes or no because that would lend credence to the topic.

Racism in all of it's forms is wrong and I see a better future where the generations to come are colorblind to race and treat each other based on their behavior and not their appearance.

Disclaimer: I support the right of the OP to raise this topic in this forum and I am not implying that the OP is a racist either. Instead I am just exercising my right to express my opinion of the subject matter provided in the OP.

McWhorter's statement sure did resonate with me as I have been told that very thing, at least by implication, here at USMB and elsewhere. So I don't see it as a fallacy at all.

And perhaps Derideo_Te could clarify a bit how the rest of his comments relate to the thread topic or answer the question presented as the thread topic?

Far from "resonating with me" I had the exact opposite reaction. I was appalled by the veiled racist implications.

My comments stand by themselves. MacWhorter is trying to excuse racism and blame the victims IMO. I called that out.

Veiled racist implications? There was nothing veiled about it. McWhorter's entire essay is on the subject of racism. And I don't see how anybody can read McWhorter's essay or the few paragraphs I excerpted from it to highlight in the OP, and conclude that he is in any way excusing racism. Not even if you take the one line you excerpted and omit the two paragraphs following it that expand on his intent with that line.

Did you read the essay?

Could you explain how his statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" in any way excuses racism? And on what basis do you call it a fallacy?

Remember his essay was inspired by a mandatory requirement to attend "White Privilege 101" classes as explained in his essay.

My take from his thesis is that this kind of thing only perpetuates racism and is not helping. That conclusion is in fact somewhat veiled, but is obvious I think to somebody who reads what he wrote as he intended for it to be understood.

Please allow me to clarify my post since it is apparent that it needs clarification.

The OP provided this poll;

View attachment 37949

That was followed by MacWhorter's statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" .

Those loaded and biased questions followed by what you extracted from MacWhorter's essay set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO.

That might not have been your intention but that is how it comes across so I called that out. I explicitly stated my position as being opposed to racism in all of it's forms.

Which brings us to these questions.

Are the questions in your poll helping or hurting black people?

Does this thread help or hurt black people by questioning the focus on white privilege?

Reinforcing negative stereotypes by posing loaded and biased questions is what I am seeing in the OP.

The poll questions are based on attitudes you see expressed on every thread on racism on every message board everywhere, expressed by talking heads demanding politically correct attitudes, expressed by race baiters and those who personally profit from race baiting. And if you don't like any one of them--if it does not express your point of view--you do not check that option. Loaded and biased? Not when there is a choice to agree or not.

And IMO what you concluded was an OP that "set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO." is really a very glaringly incorrect interpretation of what McWhorter was saying.

Do the questions in the poll help or hurt black people? Neither as neither was my purpose for posting them. They are intended to focus those who are interested on what their attitudes about racism really are as that is exactly what McWhorter's essay was all about.
Is the thesis of the OP intended to help or hurt black people? Neither. It is my effort to have an honest discussion about racism--both means by which it is socially perpetuated by those pretending they are trying to combat it and the unintended consequences of those efforts to combat it.

These things have to be part of the discussion or there is only angry noise and we continue to hurt people, all people, because we are unaware of or refuse to admit the real results of what we do.

McWhorter's essay was brilliant and provided a vehicle to do that in a focused manner.

Thank you for proving my point.

You might not have intended to be racist but you used racist terminology. Does that make you a racist? Not necessarily. It just means that you are unaware that you are using racist terminology.

If you want to have an honest discussion then you have to be prepared to examine yourself and how you appear to others by what you post.

If my statements have put you on the defensive then no, we won't have an honest discussion because you will simply defend what you posted and claim that it isn't biased when it clearly is biased.

In order for there to be an open discussion no one can be above legitimate criticism.

Are you willing to do that?

Are you willing to defend the racism inherent in this question? Or can you admit that it is racially biased?

If instead you deflect and claim that others have asked the same question then you are defending the inherent racist bias in your question.

That is how it works.

 

[Foxfyre]

White privilege certainly exists - and should be encouraged/preserved for future generations of Whites in countries and territories where Whites are the demographic majority - due to instincts buried in our subconscious; but its conceptualisation has mainly been used as a means of polarising and aggitating the masses to sell headlines.

I can't really agree with that Swagger, though I do believe us white people should be no more ashamed to be white than persons of other races should be ashamed of being born who and what they are.

But until we start treating skin color as of no more consequence than hair color or eye color, I am afraid the white race will continue to be demonized by racist opportunists and racism will remain alive and well because it is so easily used for fun and profit and political advantage.

Lets go back to the above statement. I would like to know what you meant by it.

What must we do to kill racism?

Kill all white people and black people, or control everyone's ability to have free thoughts.

Sounds like the goals of eugenicists and authoritarians.


Live in an Utopian world view much?


Seriously, it's pretty simple.

As long as politicians and elites who control the media find a benefit in controlling the masses by creating divisions and hatred in order to get elected and steer attention away from important matters, the blame game and bigotry will continue.

Bull. You find racism and bigotry in people who do not vote, don't pay attention to politics and couldn't name the three branches of the US government if a gun was at their head.

You and I both pay attention....and..... therefore are being controlled by the media? I'd say that both you and I are aware of what the "important matters" are. Are you a bigot as a result? I'm not.

As long as racism exists in the masses, as mass influential movements, IT WILL affect the voting.

If you seriously don't believe that, then you don't know shit about the last presidential election, and you don't know anything about electoral politics.



Here you are arguing about race and racism as a problem that needs to be addressed, yet, you haven't gotten the entire point of the thread. If we just start treating everyone the same, and quit making such a big deal out of it, it will not breed division and resentment. The solution is here and now. You just don't want to accept it.

We're on the same page but watch the ad hominem please. Nobody has to agree with LL;s expressed opinion but he is perfectly entitled to it and it isn't allowed to draw assumptions from those opinions about what a member wants or doesn't want or other aspects of character.

McWhorter's approach to the topic is definitely off the beaten path and is soooooo politically incorrect, that it is hard for some to get past that and even try to understand what he is saying. He touches on the consequences of racism that the politically correct group won't even acknowledge much less talk about. And his opinion that this could be deliberate by those who profit from racism is more subtle, but I think it is there.

 

[LoneLaugher]

White privilege certainly exists - and should be encouraged/preserved for future generations of Whites in countries and territories where Whites are the demographic majority - due to instincts buried in our subconscious; but its conceptualisation has mainly been used as a means of polarising and aggitating the masses to sell headlines.

I can't really agree with that Swagger, though I do believe us white people should be no more ashamed to be white than persons of other races should be ashamed of being born who and what they are.

But until we start treating skin color as of no more consequence than hair color or eye color, I am afraid the white race will continue to be demonized by racist opportunists and racism will remain alive and well because it is so easily used for fun and profit and political advantage.

Lets go back to the above statement. I would like to know what you meant by it.

What must we do to kill racism?

Kill all white people and black people, or control everyone's ability to have free thoughts.

Sounds like the goals of eugenicists and authoritarians.


Live in an Utopian world view much?


Seriously, it's pretty simple.

As long as politicians and elites who control the media find a benefit in controlling the masses by creating divisions and hatred in order to get elected and steer attention away from important matters, the blame game and bigotry will continue.

Bull. You find racism and bigotry in people who do not vote, don't pay attention to politics and couldn't name the three branches of the US government if a gun was at their head.

You and I both pay attention....and..... therefore are being controlled by the media? I'd say that both you and I are aware of what the "important matters" are. Are you a bigot as a result? I'm not.

As long as racism exists in the masses, as mass influential movements, IT WILL affect the voting.

If you seriously don't believe that, then you don't know shit about the last presidential election, and you don't know anything about electoral politics.



Here you are arguing about race and racism as a problem that needs to be addressed, yet, you haven't gotten the entire point of the thread. If we just start treating everyone the same, and quit making such a big deal out of it, it will not breed division and resentment. The solution is here and now. You just don't want to accept it.

I'm not disputing the idea that treating everyone the same is a positive thing. I'm disputing the FUCKED UP idea that it is those who oppose racism who are making racists be racist (thereby promoting racism) because we keep holding their feet to the fire and telling them to knock it off.

I also dispute the idea that you can wipe the slate clean after centuries of discrimination......otherwise described as affirmative action for white people...ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO LEGAL SEGREGATION when it comes to schools and housing.....and exclaim...."It's all good!" We are now all starting from the same place!.....pull up those shorts and grab those bootstraps, yo!"

 

[Foxfyre]

McWhorter's statement sure did resonate with me as I have been told that very thing, at least by implication, here at USMB and elsewhere. So I don't see it as a fallacy at all.

And perhaps Derideo_Te could clarify a bit how the rest of his comments relate to the thread topic or answer the question presented as the thread topic?

Far from "resonating with me" I had the exact opposite reaction. I was appalled by the veiled racist implications.

My comments stand by themselves. MacWhorter is trying to excuse racism and blame the victims IMO. I called that out.

Veiled racist implications? There was nothing veiled about it. McWhorter's entire essay is on the subject of racism. And I don't see how anybody can read McWhorter's essay or the few paragraphs I excerpted from it to highlight in the OP, and conclude that he is in any way excusing racism. Not even if you take the one line you excerpted and omit the two paragraphs following it that expand on his intent with that line.

Did you read the essay?

Could you explain how his statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" in any way excuses racism? And on what basis do you call it a fallacy?

Remember his essay was inspired by a mandatory requirement to attend "White Privilege 101" classes as explained in his essay.

My take from his thesis is that this kind of thing only perpetuates racism and is not helping. That conclusion is in fact somewhat veiled, but is obvious I think to somebody who reads what he wrote as he intended for it to be understood.

Please allow me to clarify my post since it is apparent that it needs clarification.

The OP provided this poll;

View attachment 37949

That was followed by MacWhorter's statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" .

Those loaded and biased questions followed by what you extracted from MacWhorter's essay set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO.

That might not have been your intention but that is how it comes across so I called that out. I explicitly stated my position as being opposed to racism in all of it's forms.

Which brings us to these questions.

Are the questions in your poll helping or hurting black people?

Does this thread help or hurt black people by questioning the focus on white privilege?

Reinforcing negative stereotypes by posing loaded and biased questions is what I am seeing in the OP.

The poll questions are based on attitudes you see expressed on every thread on racism on every message board everywhere, expressed by talking heads demanding politically correct attitudes, expressed by race baiters and those who personally profit from race baiting. And if you don't like any one of them--if it does not express your point of view--you do not check that option. Loaded and biased? Not when there is a choice to agree or not.

And IMO what you concluded was an OP that "set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO." is really a very glaringly incorrect interpretation of what McWhorter was saying.

Do the questions in the poll help or hurt black people? Neither as neither was my purpose for posting them. They are intended to focus those who are interested on what their attitudes about racism really are as that is exactly what McWhorter's essay was all about.
Is the thesis of the OP intended to help or hurt black people? Neither. It is my effort to have an honest discussion about racism--both means by which it is socially perpetuated by those pretending they are trying to combat it and the unintended consequences of those efforts to combat it.

These things have to be part of the discussion or there is only angry noise and we continue to hurt people, all people, because we are unaware of or refuse to admit the real results of what we do.

McWhorter's essay was brilliant and provided a vehicle to do that in a focused manner.

Thank you for proving my point.

You might not have intended to be racist but you used racist terminology. Does that make you a racist? Not necessarily. It just means that you are unaware that you are using racist terminology.

If you want to have an honest discussion then you have to be prepared to examine yourself and how you appear to others by what you post.

If my statements have put you on the defensive then no, we won't have an honest discussion because you will simply defend what you posted and claim that it isn't biased when it clearly is biased.

In order for there to be an open discussion no one can be above legitimate criticism.

Are you willing to do that?

Are you willing to defend the racism inherent in this question? Or can you admit that it is racially biased?

View attachment 37958

If instead you deflect and claim that others have asked the same question then you are defending the inherent racist bias in your question.

That is how it works.

The OP is not about criticism of Derideo_te or Foxfyre or anybody else. The OP invites a discussion of racism as specifically related to the concept of white privilege as McWhorter portrays it in his essay.

I will insist that we focus on that with the understanding that it is impossible to have a discussion of racism without using terminology related to racism.. If you wish a different discussion, I will invite you to start your own thread with my blessings.

Any statement made by any member, including me, posting in this thread is fair game to be questioned for clarification, argued with, criticized, or rebutted and everybody who disagrees should give that their best shot. But criticism of the member making the statement or analyzing whether the member is or is not racist or defensive or any other comments on his/her character is ad hominem and expressly disallowed in Rule #2 for the thread.

 

[Foxfyre]

I can't really agree with that Swagger, though I do believe us white people should be no more ashamed to be white than persons of other races should be ashamed of being born who and what they are.

But until we start treating skin color as of no more consequence than hair color or eye color, I am afraid the white race will continue to be demonized by racist opportunists and racism will remain alive and well because it is so easily used for fun and profit and political advantage.

Lets go back to the above statement. I would like to know what you meant by it.

What must we do to kill racism?

Kill all white people and black people, or control everyone's ability to have free thoughts.

Sounds like the goals of eugenicists and authoritarians.


Live in an Utopian world view much?


Seriously, it's pretty simple.

As long as politicians and elites who control the media find a benefit in controlling the masses by creating divisions and hatred in order to get elected and steer attention away from important matters, the blame game and bigotry will continue.

Bull. You find racism and bigotry in people who do not vote, don't pay attention to politics and couldn't name the three branches of the US government if a gun was at their head.

You and I both pay attention....and..... therefore are being controlled by the media? I'd say that both you and I are aware of what the "important matters" are. Are you a bigot as a result? I'm not.

As long as racism exists in the masses, as mass influential movements, IT WILL affect the voting.

If you seriously don't believe that, then you don't know shit about the last presidential election, and you don't know anything about electoral politics.



Here you are arguing about race and racism as a problem that needs to be addressed, yet, you haven't gotten the entire point of the thread. If we just start treating everyone the same, and quit making such a big deal out of it, it will not breed division and resentment. The solution is here and now. You just don't want to accept it.

I'm not disputing the idea that treating everyone the same is a positive thing. I'm disputing the FUCKED UP idea that it is those who oppose racism who are making racists be racist (thereby promoting racism) because we keep holding their feet to the fire and telling them to knock it off.

I also dispute the idea that you can wipe the slate clean after centuries of discrimination......otherwise described as affirmative action for white people...ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO LEGAL SEGREGATION when it comes to schools and housing.....and exclaim...."It's all good!" We are now all starting from the same place!.....pull up those shorts and grab those bootstraps, yo!"

McWhorter was not opposing those who oppose racism. He was obviously opposing it himself. But he focused on how that is sometimes done and the unintended consequences of what we do that perpetuate racism.

What do you think he meant by this statement?:

To be sure, there is, indeed, a distinct White Privilege. Being white does offer a freedom not easily available to others. You can underperform without it being ascribed to your race. And when you excel, no one wonders whether Affirmative Action had anything to do with it. Authority figures are likely to be your color, and no one associates people of your color with a propensity to violence. No one expects you to represent your race in a class discussion or anywhere else. . . .​

 

[Derideo_Te]

Far from "resonating with me" I had the exact opposite reaction. I was appalled by the veiled racist implications.

My comments stand by themselves. MacWhorter is trying to excuse racism and blame the victims IMO. I called that out.

Veiled racist implications? There was nothing veiled about it. McWhorter's entire essay is on the subject of racism. And I don't see how anybody can read McWhorter's essay or the few paragraphs I excerpted from it to highlight in the OP, and conclude that he is in any way excusing racism. Not even if you take the one line you excerpted and omit the two paragraphs following it that expand on his intent with that line.

Did you read the essay?

Could you explain how his statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" in any way excuses racism? And on what basis do you call it a fallacy?

Remember his essay was inspired by a mandatory requirement to attend "White Privilege 101" classes as explained in his essay.

My take from his thesis is that this kind of thing only perpetuates racism and is not helping. That conclusion is in fact somewhat veiled, but is obvious I think to somebody who reads what he wrote as he intended for it to be understood.

Please allow me to clarify my post since it is apparent that it needs clarification.

The OP provided this poll;

View attachment 37949

That was followed by MacWhorter's statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" .

Those loaded and biased questions followed by what you extracted from MacWhorter's essay set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO.

That might not have been your intention but that is how it comes across so I called that out. I explicitly stated my position as being opposed to racism in all of it's forms.

Which brings us to these questions.

Are the questions in your poll helping or hurting black people?

Does this thread help or hurt black people by questioning the focus on white privilege?

Reinforcing negative stereotypes by posing loaded and biased questions is what I am seeing in the OP.

The poll questions are based on attitudes you see expressed on every thread on racism on every message board everywhere, expressed by talking heads demanding politically correct attitudes, expressed by race baiters and those who personally profit from race baiting. And if you don't like any one of them--if it does not express your point of view--you do not check that option. Loaded and biased? Not when there is a choice to agree or not.

And IMO what you concluded was an OP that "set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO." is really a very glaringly incorrect interpretation of what McWhorter was saying.

Do the questions in the poll help or hurt black people? Neither as neither was my purpose for posting them. They are intended to focus those who are interested on what their attitudes about racism really are as that is exactly what McWhorter's essay was all about.
Is the thesis of the OP intended to help or hurt black people? Neither. It is my effort to have an honest discussion about racism--both means by which it is socially perpetuated by those pretending they are trying to combat it and the unintended consequences of those efforts to combat it.

These things have to be part of the discussion or there is only angry noise and we continue to hurt people, all people, because we are unaware of or refuse to admit the real results of what we do.

McWhorter's essay was brilliant and provided a vehicle to do that in a focused manner.

Thank you for proving my point.

You might not have intended to be racist but you used racist terminology. Does that make you a racist? Not necessarily. It just means that you are unaware that you are using racist terminology.

If you want to have an honest discussion then you have to be prepared to examine yourself and how you appear to others by what you post.

If my statements have put you on the defensive then no, we won't have an honest discussion because you will simply defend what you posted and claim that it isn't biased when it clearly is biased.

In order for there to be an open discussion no one can be above legitimate criticism.

Are you willing to do that?

Are you willing to defend the racism inherent in this question? Or can you admit that it is racially biased?

View attachment 37958

If instead you deflect and claim that others have asked the same question then you are defending the inherent racist bias in your question.

That is how it works.

The OP is not about criticism of Derideo_te or Foxfyre or anybody else. The OP invites a discussion of racism as specifically related to the concept of white privilege as McWhorter portrays it in his essay.

I will insist that we focus on that with the understanding that it is impossible to have a discussion of racism without using terminology related to racism.. If you wish a different discussion, I will invite you to start your own thread with my blessings.

Any statement made by any member, including me, posting in this thread is fair game to be questioned for clarification, argued with, criticized, or rebutted and everybody who disagrees should give that their best shot. But criticism of the member making the statement or analyzing whether the member is or is not racist or defensive or any other comments on his/her character is ad hominem and expressly disallowed in Rule #2 for the thread.

In which case report it as an ad hom!

You were asked to defend just one of the biased questions in your OP.

Either you defend it or tacitly admit that you have no intention of honestly dealing with the legitimate criticism of your own OP.

Your choice.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Lets go back to the above statement. I would like to know what you meant by it.

What must we do to kill racism?

Kill all white people and black people, or control everyone's ability to have free thoughts.

Sounds like the goals of eugenicists and authoritarians.


Live in an Utopian world view much?


Seriously, it's pretty simple.

As long as politicians and elites who control the media find a benefit in controlling the masses by creating divisions and hatred in order to get elected and steer attention away from important matters, the blame game and bigotry will continue.

Bull. You find racism and bigotry in people who do not vote, don't pay attention to politics and couldn't name the three branches of the US government if a gun was at their head.

You and I both pay attention....and..... therefore are being controlled by the media? I'd say that both you and I are aware of what the "important matters" are. Are you a bigot as a result? I'm not.

As long as racism exists in the masses, as mass influential movements, IT WILL affect the voting.

If you seriously don't believe that, then you don't know shit about the last presidential election, and you don't know anything about electoral politics.



Here you are arguing about race and racism as a problem that needs to be addressed, yet, you haven't gotten the entire point of the thread. If we just start treating everyone the same, and quit making such a big deal out of it, it will not breed division and resentment. The solution is here and now. You just don't want to accept it.

I'm not disputing the idea that treating everyone the same is a positive thing. I'm disputing the FUCKED UP idea that it is those who oppose racism who are making racists be racist (thereby promoting racism) because we keep holding their feet to the fire and telling them to knock it off.

I also dispute the idea that you can wipe the slate clean after centuries of discrimination......otherwise described as affirmative action for white people...ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO LEGAL SEGREGATION when it comes to schools and housing.....and exclaim...."It's all good!" We are now all starting from the same place!.....pull up those shorts and grab those bootstraps, yo!"

McWhorter was no opposing those who oppose racism. He was obviously opposing it himself. But he focused on how that is sometimes done and the unintended consequences of what we do that perpetuate racism.

What do you think he meant by this statement?:

To be sure, there is, indeed, a distinct White Privilege. Being white does offer a freedom not easily available to others. You can underperform without it being ascribed to your race. And when you excel, no one wonders whether Affirmative Action had anything to do with it. Authority figures are likely to be your color, and no one associates people of your color with a propensity to violence. No one expects you to represent your race in a class discussion or anywhere else. . . .​

I think he was accurate in that statement. I just think that taking that statement and concluding that there is no longer a need for attention to be paid to the OBVIOUS opportunity deficit that black Americans must contend with is very odd.

I think you are saying that we have harmed the prospects of black Americans by focusing on the historical fact that they have not had an even playing field. If only we stop trying to compensate for that....and JUST TREAT THEM LIKE THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN EQUAL NOW THAT THE LAW STATES THAT THEY ARE EQUAL, we can end racism in this country.

Sorry. We just aren't there yet.

 

[Foxfyre]

Veiled racist implications? There was nothing veiled about it. McWhorter's entire essay is on the subject of racism. And I don't see how anybody can read McWhorter's essay or the few paragraphs I excerpted from it to highlight in the OP, and conclude that he is in any way excusing racism. Not even if you take the one line you excerpted and omit the two paragraphs following it that expand on his intent with that line.

Did you read the essay?

Could you explain how his statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" in any way excuses racism? And on what basis do you call it a fallacy?

Remember his essay was inspired by a mandatory requirement to attend "White Privilege 101" classes as explained in his essay.

My take from his thesis is that this kind of thing only perpetuates racism and is not helping. That conclusion is in fact somewhat veiled, but is obvious I think to somebody who reads what he wrote as he intended for it to be understood.

Please allow me to clarify my post since it is apparent that it needs clarification.

The OP provided this poll;

View attachment 37949

That was followed by MacWhorter's statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" .

Those loaded and biased questions followed by what you extracted from MacWhorter's essay set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO.

That might not have been your intention but that is how it comes across so I called that out. I explicitly stated my position as being opposed to racism in all of it's forms.

Which brings us to these questions.

Are the questions in your poll helping or hurting black people?

Does this thread help or hurt black people by questioning the focus on white privilege?

Reinforcing negative stereotypes by posing loaded and biased questions is what I am seeing in the OP.

The poll questions are based on attitudes you see expressed on every thread on racism on every message board everywhere, expressed by talking heads demanding politically correct attitudes, expressed by race baiters and those who personally profit from race baiting. And if you don't like any one of them--if it does not express your point of view--you do not check that option. Loaded and biased? Not when there is a choice to agree or not.

And IMO what you concluded was an OP that "set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO." is really a very glaringly incorrect interpretation of what McWhorter was saying.

Do the questions in the poll help or hurt black people? Neither as neither was my purpose for posting them. They are intended to focus those who are interested on what their attitudes about racism really are as that is exactly what McWhorter's essay was all about.
Is the thesis of the OP intended to help or hurt black people? Neither. It is my effort to have an honest discussion about racism--both means by which it is socially perpetuated by those pretending they are trying to combat it and the unintended consequences of those efforts to combat it.

These things have to be part of the discussion or there is only angry noise and we continue to hurt people, all people, because we are unaware of or refuse to admit the real results of what we do.

McWhorter's essay was brilliant and provided a vehicle to do that in a focused manner.

Thank you for proving my point.

You might not have intended to be racist but you used racist terminology. Does that make you a racist? Not necessarily. It just means that you are unaware that you are using racist terminology.

If you want to have an honest discussion then you have to be prepared to examine yourself and how you appear to others by what you post.

If my statements have put you on the defensive then no, we won't have an honest discussion because you will simply defend what you posted and claim that it isn't biased when it clearly is biased.

In order for there to be an open discussion no one can be above legitimate criticism.

Are you willing to do that?

Are you willing to defend the racism inherent in this question? Or can you admit that it is racially biased?

View attachment 37958

If instead you deflect and claim that others have asked the same question then you are defending the inherent racist bias in your question.

That is how it works.

The OP is not about criticism of Derideo_te or Foxfyre or anybody else. The OP invites a discussion of racism as specifically related to the concept of white privilege as McWhorter portrays it in his essay.

I will insist that we focus on that with the understanding that it is impossible to have a discussion of racism without using terminology related to racism.. If you wish a different discussion, I will invite you to start your own thread with my blessings.

Any statement made by any member, including me, posting in this thread is fair game to be questioned for clarification, argued with, criticized, or rebutted and everybody who disagrees should give that their best shot. But criticism of the member making the statement or analyzing whether the member is or is not racist or defensive or any other comments on his/her character is ad hominem and expressly disallowed in Rule #2 for the thread.

In which case report it as an ad hom!

You were asked to defend just one of the biased questions in your OP.

Either you defend it or tacitly admit that you have no intention of honestly dealing with the legitimate criticism of your own OP.

Your choice.

Perhaps if you restate the question your are concerned about and explain why it is racist, then I would have a chance to rebut that.

If you are going to say that just asking people whether they do or do not agree with a statement about racism is in itself racist, you're going to have to explain how that is racist too if you wish for me to rebut it. Because I say it is in no way racist.

You are going to have to be specific about what you find objectionable about the OP before anybody can know what you are objecting to. Just saying it is racist without saying why or how it is racist just doesn't cut it.

That's how it works.

 

[Foxfyre]

Kill all white people and black people, or control everyone's ability to have free thoughts.

Sounds like the goals of eugenicists and authoritarians.


Live in an Utopian world view much?


Seriously, it's pretty simple.

As long as politicians and elites who control the media find a benefit in controlling the masses by creating divisions and hatred in order to get elected and steer attention away from important matters, the blame game and bigotry will continue.

Bull. You find racism and bigotry in people who do not vote, don't pay attention to politics and couldn't name the three branches of the US government if a gun was at their head.

You and I both pay attention....and..... therefore are being controlled by the media? I'd say that both you and I are aware of what the "important matters" are. Are you a bigot as a result? I'm not.

As long as racism exists in the masses, as mass influential movements, IT WILL affect the voting.

If you seriously don't believe that, then you don't know shit about the last presidential election, and you don't know anything about electoral politics.



Here you are arguing about race and racism as a problem that needs to be addressed, yet, you haven't gotten the entire point of the thread. If we just start treating everyone the same, and quit making such a big deal out of it, it will not breed division and resentment. The solution is here and now. You just don't want to accept it.

I'm not disputing the idea that treating everyone the same is a positive thing. I'm disputing the FUCKED UP idea that it is those who oppose racism who are making racists be racist (thereby promoting racism) because we keep holding their feet to the fire and telling them to knock it off.

I also dispute the idea that you can wipe the slate clean after centuries of discrimination......otherwise described as affirmative action for white people...ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO LEGAL SEGREGATION when it comes to schools and housing.....and exclaim...."It's all good!" We are now all starting from the same place!.....pull up those shorts and grab those bootstraps, yo!"

McWhorter was no opposing those who oppose racism. He was obviously opposing it himself. But he focused on how that is sometimes done and the unintended consequences of what we do that perpetuate racism.

What do you think he meant by this statement?:

To be sure, there is, indeed, a distinct White Privilege. Being white does offer a freedom not easily available to others. You can underperform without it being ascribed to your race. And when you excel, no one wonders whether Affirmative Action had anything to do with it. Authority figures are likely to be your color, and no one associates people of your color with a propensity to violence. No one expects you to represent your race in a class discussion or anywhere else. . . .​

I think he was accurate in that statement. I just think that taking that statement and concluding that there is no longer a need for attention to be paid to the OBVIOUS opportunity deficit that black Americans must contend with is very odd.

I think you are saying that we have harmed the prospects of black Americans by focusing on the historical fact that they have not had an even playing field. If only we stop trying to compensate for that....and JUST TREAT THEM LIKE THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN EQUAL NOW THAT THE LAW STATES THAT THEY ARE EQUAL, we can end racism in this country.

Sorry. We just aren't there yet.

And how do we get there?

For example, do we get there by pushing more Affirmative Action programs, counting the number of black faces in the company photo, checking to see if there are enough black kids on the team? And correcting any inequities in racial balance by edict instead of qualifications?

That only perpetuates the perception that the black person doesn't have to perform as well to make the team, to get the job, to merit raises, promotions, bonuses, etc That he doesn't have to qualify using the same criteria used for white people. That has to be so frustrating for those black people who do qualify and earned everything they have but that cloud of suspicion still hangs over their heads..

The "White Privilege" of which McWhorter speaks acknowledges that we haven't subjected white people to Affirmative Action and so nobody questions that the average white guy earned his position on merit. Nobody ever suspects that he is there as the mandatory 'token'. Our efforts to correct past wrongs with black people did break down barriers back in the 1960's and 70's. But to continue them now is actually disadvantaging black people in just the way McWhorter described.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Bull. You find racism and bigotry in people who do not vote, don't pay attention to politics and couldn't name the three branches of the US government if a gun was at their head.

You and I both pay attention....and..... therefore are being controlled by the media? I'd say that both you and I are aware of what the "important matters" are. Are you a bigot as a result? I'm not.

As long as racism exists in the masses, as mass influential movements, IT WILL affect the voting.

If you seriously don't believe that, then you don't know shit about the last presidential election, and you don't know anything about electoral politics.



Here you are arguing about race and racism as a problem that needs to be addressed, yet, you haven't gotten the entire point of the thread. If we just start treating everyone the same, and quit making such a big deal out of it, it will not breed division and resentment. The solution is here and now. You just don't want to accept it.

I'm not disputing the idea that treating everyone the same is a positive thing. I'm disputing the FUCKED UP idea that it is those who oppose racism who are making racists be racist (thereby promoting racism) because we keep holding their feet to the fire and telling them to knock it off.

I also dispute the idea that you can wipe the slate clean after centuries of discrimination......otherwise described as affirmative action for white people...ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO LEGAL SEGREGATION when it comes to schools and housing.....and exclaim...."It's all good!" We are now all starting from the same place!.....pull up those shorts and grab those bootstraps, yo!"

McWhorter was no opposing those who oppose racism. He was obviously opposing it himself. But he focused on how that is sometimes done and the unintended consequences of what we do that perpetuate racism.

What do you think he meant by this statement?:

To be sure, there is, indeed, a distinct White Privilege. Being white does offer a freedom not easily available to others. You can underperform without it being ascribed to your race. And when you excel, no one wonders whether Affirmative Action had anything to do with it. Authority figures are likely to be your color, and no one associates people of your color with a propensity to violence. No one expects you to represent your race in a class discussion or anywhere else. . . .​

I think he was accurate in that statement. I just think that taking that statement and concluding that there is no longer a need for attention to be paid to the OBVIOUS opportunity deficit that black Americans must contend with is very odd.

I think you are saying that we have harmed the prospects of black Americans by focusing on the historical fact that they have not had an even playing field. If only we stop trying to compensate for that....and JUST TREAT THEM LIKE THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN EQUAL NOW THAT THE LAW STATES THAT THEY ARE EQUAL, we can end racism in this country.

Sorry. We just aren't there yet.

And how do we get there?

For example, do we get there by pushing more Affirmative Action programs, counting the number of black faces in the company photo, checking to see if there are enough black kids on the team? And correcting any inequities in racial balance by edict instead of qualifications?

That only perpetuates the perception that the black person doesn't have to perform as well to make the team, to get the job, tomerit raises, promotions, bonuses, etc That he doesn't have to qualify using the same criteria used for white people. That has to be so frustrating for those black people who do qualify and earned everything they have but that cloud of suspicion still hangs over their heads..

The "White Privilege" of which McWhorter speaks acknowledges that we haven't subjected white people to Affirmative Action and so nobody questions that the average white guy earned his position on merit. Nobody ever suspects that he is there as the mandatory 'token'. Our efforts to correct past wrongs with black people did break down barriers back in the 1960's and 70's. But to continue them now is actually disadvantaging black people in just the way McWhorter described.

Personal anecdote.

I provide my customers with swimsuit calendars every year. I have had no less than 6 former customers ( a small percentage, but not zero ) who have refused the calendar because one of the models was black.

Do you understand the implications of that? It means that we have not achieved the goal. There are still barriers to straight up equality. If we permitted it, those business owners would hire only white people.......period. There is a percentage of American business owners who need to be forced to treat all Americans equally. Therefore...we have not moved beyond the need for some legal recourse for those who have been discriminated against.

I don't buy the idea that "those black people people who do qualify and earned everything they have but that cloud of suspicion still hangs over their heads" are frustrated. They have lived the life. They know the score.

Take this guy, for example:

I taught my black kids that their elite upbringing would protect them from discrimination. I was wrong. - The Washington Post

He earned everything he has. He's still not feeling equal.

When does this debate end with a concession? Never?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Please allow me to clarify my post since it is apparent that it needs clarification.

The OP provided this poll;

View attachment 37949

That was followed by MacWhorter's statement "If you’ve been white lately, you have likely been confronted with the idea that to be a good person, you must cultivate a guilt complex over the privileged status your race enjoys" .

Those loaded and biased questions followed by what you extracted from MacWhorter's essay set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO.

That might not have been your intention but that is how it comes across so I called that out. I explicitly stated my position as being opposed to racism in all of it's forms.

Which brings us to these questions.

Are the questions in your poll helping or hurting black people?

Does this thread help or hurt black people by questioning the focus on white privilege?

Reinforcing negative stereotypes by posing loaded and biased questions is what I am seeing in the OP.

The poll questions are based on attitudes you see expressed on every thread on racism on every message board everywhere, expressed by talking heads demanding politically correct attitudes, expressed by race baiters and those who personally profit from race baiting. And if you don't like any one of them--if it does not express your point of view--you do not check that option. Loaded and biased? Not when there is a choice to agree or not.

And IMO what you concluded was an OP that "set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO." is really a very glaringly incorrect interpretation of what McWhorter was saying.

Do the questions in the poll help or hurt black people? Neither as neither was my purpose for posting them. They are intended to focus those who are interested on what their attitudes about racism really are as that is exactly what McWhorter's essay was all about.
Is the thesis of the OP intended to help or hurt black people? Neither. It is my effort to have an honest discussion about racism--both means by which it is socially perpetuated by those pretending they are trying to combat it and the unintended consequences of those efforts to combat it.

These things have to be part of the discussion or there is only angry noise and we continue to hurt people, all people, because we are unaware of or refuse to admit the real results of what we do.

McWhorter's essay was brilliant and provided a vehicle to do that in a focused manner.

Thank you for proving my point.

You might not have intended to be racist but you used racist terminology. Does that make you a racist? Not necessarily. It just means that you are unaware that you are using racist terminology.

If you want to have an honest discussion then you have to be prepared to examine yourself and how you appear to others by what you post.

If my statements have put you on the defensive then no, we won't have an honest discussion because you will simply defend what you posted and claim that it isn't biased when it clearly is biased.

In order for there to be an open discussion no one can be above legitimate criticism.

Are you willing to do that?

Are you willing to defend the racism inherent in this question? Or can you admit that it is racially biased?

View attachment 37958

If instead you deflect and claim that others have asked the same question then you are defending the inherent racist bias in your question.

That is how it works.

The OP is not about criticism of Derideo_te or Foxfyre or anybody else. The OP invites a discussion of racism as specifically related to the concept of white privilege as McWhorter portrays it in his essay.

I will insist that we focus on that with the understanding that it is impossible to have a discussion of racism without using terminology related to racism.. If you wish a different discussion, I will invite you to start your own thread with my blessings.

Any statement made by any member, including me, posting in this thread is fair game to be questioned for clarification, argued with, criticized, or rebutted and everybody who disagrees should give that their best shot. But criticism of the member making the statement or analyzing whether the member is or is not racist or defensive or any other comments on his/her character is ad hominem and expressly disallowed in Rule #2 for the thread.

In which case report it as an ad hom!

You were asked to defend just one of the biased questions in your OP.

Either you defend it or tacitly admit that you have no intention of honestly dealing with the legitimate criticism of your own OP.

Your choice.

Perhaps if you restate the question your are concerned about and explain why it is racist, then I would have a chance to rebut that.

If you are going to say that just asking people whether they do or do not agree with a statement about racism is in itself racist, you're going to have to explain how that is racist too if you wish for me to rebut it. Because I say it is in no way racist.

You are going to have to be specific about what you find objectionable about the OP before anybody can know what you are objecting to. Just saying it is racist without saying why or how it is racist just doesn't cut it.

That's how it works.

Do you honestly believe that there is nothing racist in stating "Black people are unable to achieve equality without government programs"?

Is that specific enough for you?

 

[Foxfyre]

The poll questions are based on attitudes you see expressed on every thread on racism on every message board everywhere, expressed by talking heads demanding politically correct attitudes, expressed by race baiters and those who personally profit from race baiting. And if you don't like any one of them--if it does not express your point of view--you do not check that option. Loaded and biased? Not when there is a choice to agree or not.

And IMO what you concluded was an OP that "set this thread up as an excuse for racists to deny that they are being racists IMO." is really a very glaringly incorrect interpretation of what McWhorter was saying.

Do the questions in the poll help or hurt black people? Neither as neither was my purpose for posting them. They are intended to focus those who are interested on what their attitudes about racism really are as that is exactly what McWhorter's essay was all about.
Is the thesis of the OP intended to help or hurt black people? Neither. It is my effort to have an honest discussion about racism--both means by which it is socially perpetuated by those pretending they are trying to combat it and the unintended consequences of those efforts to combat it.

These things have to be part of the discussion or there is only angry noise and we continue to hurt people, all people, because we are unaware of or refuse to admit the real results of what we do.

McWhorter's essay was brilliant and provided a vehicle to do that in a focused manner.

Thank you for proving my point.

You might not have intended to be racist but you used racist terminology. Does that make you a racist? Not necessarily. It just means that you are unaware that you are using racist terminology.

If you want to have an honest discussion then you have to be prepared to examine yourself and how you appear to others by what you post.

If my statements have put you on the defensive then no, we won't have an honest discussion because you will simply defend what you posted and claim that it isn't biased when it clearly is biased.

In order for there to be an open discussion no one can be above legitimate criticism.

Are you willing to do that?

Are you willing to defend the racism inherent in this question? Or can you admit that it is racially biased?

View attachment 37958

If instead you deflect and claim that others have asked the same question then you are defending the inherent racist bias in your question.

That is how it works.

The OP is not about criticism of Derideo_te or Foxfyre or anybody else. The OP invites a discussion of racism as specifically related to the concept of white privilege as McWhorter portrays it in his essay.

I will insist that we focus on that with the understanding that it is impossible to have a discussion of racism without using terminology related to racism.. If you wish a different discussion, I will invite you to start your own thread with my blessings.

Any statement made by any member, including me, posting in this thread is fair game to be questioned for clarification, argued with, criticized, or rebutted and everybody who disagrees should give that their best shot. But criticism of the member making the statement or analyzing whether the member is or is not racist or defensive or any other comments on his/her character is ad hominem and expressly disallowed in Rule #2 for the thread.

In which case report it as an ad hom!

You were asked to defend just one of the biased questions in your OP.

Either you defend it or tacitly admit that you have no intention of honestly dealing with the legitimate criticism of your own OP.

Your choice.

Perhaps if you restate the question your are concerned about and explain why it is racist, then I would have a chance to rebut that.

If you are going to say that just asking people whether they do or do not agree with a statement about racism is in itself racist, you're going to have to explain how that is racist too if you wish for me to rebut it. Because I say it is in no way racist.

You are going to have to be specific about what you find objectionable about the OP before anybody can know what you are objecting to. Just saying it is racist without saying why or how it is racist just doesn't cut it.

That's how it works.

View attachment 37965

Do you honestly believe that there is nothing racist in stating "Black people are unable to achieve equality without government programs"?

Is that specific enough for you?

I definitely believe it is not a racist statement. So explain to me why it is. But remember, we already have posts by some on this thread that are specific that federal programs are necessary to help black people because of the wrongs the black people incurred. If those programs are not necessary to help black people achieve equality with white people, then why have them?

 

[Foxfyre]

As long as racism exists in the masses, as mass influential movements, IT WILL affect the voting.

If you seriously don't believe that, then you don't know shit about the last presidential election, and you don't know anything about electoral politics.



Here you are arguing about race and racism as a problem that needs to be addressed, yet, you haven't gotten the entire point of the thread. If we just start treating everyone the same, and quit making such a big deal out of it, it will not breed division and resentment. The solution is here and now. You just don't want to accept it.

I'm not disputing the idea that treating everyone the same is a positive thing. I'm disputing the FUCKED UP idea that it is those who oppose racism who are making racists be racist (thereby promoting racism) because we keep holding their feet to the fire and telling them to knock it off.

I also dispute the idea that you can wipe the slate clean after centuries of discrimination......otherwise described as affirmative action for white people...ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO LEGAL SEGREGATION when it comes to schools and housing.....and exclaim...."It's all good!" We are now all starting from the same place!.....pull up those shorts and grab those bootstraps, yo!"

McWhorter was no opposing those who oppose racism. He was obviously opposing it himself. But he focused on how that is sometimes done and the unintended consequences of what we do that perpetuate racism.

What do you think he meant by this statement?:

To be sure, there is, indeed, a distinct White Privilege. Being white does offer a freedom not easily available to others. You can underperform without it being ascribed to your race. And when you excel, no one wonders whether Affirmative Action had anything to do with it. Authority figures are likely to be your color, and no one associates people of your color with a propensity to violence. No one expects you to represent your race in a class discussion or anywhere else. . . .​

I think he was accurate in that statement. I just think that taking that statement and concluding that there is no longer a need for attention to be paid to the OBVIOUS opportunity deficit that black Americans must contend with is very odd.

I think you are saying that we have harmed the prospects of black Americans by focusing on the historical fact that they have not had an even playing field. If only we stop trying to compensate for that....and JUST TREAT THEM LIKE THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN EQUAL NOW THAT THE LAW STATES THAT THEY ARE EQUAL, we can end racism in this country.

Sorry. We just aren't there yet.

And how do we get there?

For example, do we get there by pushing more Affirmative Action programs, counting the number of black faces in the company photo, checking to see if there are enough black kids on the team? And correcting any inequities in racial balance by edict instead of qualifications?

That only perpetuates the perception that the black person doesn't have to perform as well to make the team, to get the job, tomerit raises, promotions, bonuses, etc That he doesn't have to qualify using the same criteria used for white people. That has to be so frustrating for those black people who do qualify and earned everything they have but that cloud of suspicion still hangs over their heads..

The "White Privilege" of which McWhorter speaks acknowledges that we haven't subjected white people to Affirmative Action and so nobody questions that the average white guy earned his position on merit. Nobody ever suspects that he is there as the mandatory 'token'. Our efforts to correct past wrongs with black people did break down barriers back in the 1960's and 70's. But to continue them now is actually disadvantaging black people in just the way McWhorter described.

Personal anecdote.

I provide my customers with swimsuit calendars every year. I have had no less than 6 former customers ( a small percentage, but not zero ) who have refused the calendar because one of the models was black.

Do you understand the implications of that? It means that we have not achieved the goal. There are still barriers to straight up equality. If we permitted it, those business owners would hire only white people.......period. There is a percentage of American business owners who need to be forced to treat all Americans equally. Therefore...we have not moved beyond the need for some legal recourse for those who have been discriminated against.

I don't buy the idea that "those black people people who do qualify and earned everything they have but that cloud of suspicion still hangs over their heads" are frustrated. They have lived the life. They know the score.

Take this guy, for example:

I taught my black kids that their elite upbringing would protect them from discrimination. I was wrong. - The Washington Post

He earned everything he has. He's still not feeling equal.

When does this debate end with a concession? Never?

So WHY did those customers object to the black model?

And how is McWhorter wrong that some of the very concepts that are intended to deal with racism are perpetuating attitudes that lead to more racism and discrimination?

 

[LoneLaugher]

I'm not disputing the idea that treating everyone the same is a positive thing. I'm disputing the FUCKED UP idea that it is those who oppose racism who are making racists be racist (thereby promoting racism) because we keep holding their feet to the fire and telling them to knock it off.

I also dispute the idea that you can wipe the slate clean after centuries of discrimination......otherwise described as affirmative action for white people...ESPECIALLY AS IT RELATES TO LEGAL SEGREGATION when it comes to schools and housing.....and exclaim...."It's all good!" We are now all starting from the same place!.....pull up those shorts and grab those bootstraps, yo!"

McWhorter was no opposing those who oppose racism. He was obviously opposing it himself. But he focused on how that is sometimes done and the unintended consequences of what we do that perpetuate racism.

What do you think he meant by this statement?:

To be sure, there is, indeed, a distinct White Privilege. Being white does offer a freedom not easily available to others. You can underperform without it being ascribed to your race. And when you excel, no one wonders whether Affirmative Action had anything to do with it. Authority figures are likely to be your color, and no one associates people of your color with a propensity to violence. No one expects you to represent your race in a class discussion or anywhere else. . . .​

I think he was accurate in that statement. I just think that taking that statement and concluding that there is no longer a need for attention to be paid to the OBVIOUS opportunity deficit that black Americans must contend with is very odd.

I think you are saying that we have harmed the prospects of black Americans by focusing on the historical fact that they have not had an even playing field. If only we stop trying to compensate for that....and JUST TREAT THEM LIKE THEY HAVE ALWAYS BEEN EQUAL NOW THAT THE LAW STATES THAT THEY ARE EQUAL, we can end racism in this country.

Sorry. We just aren't there yet.

And how do we get there?

For example, do we get there by pushing more Affirmative Action programs, counting the number of black faces in the company photo, checking to see if there are enough black kids on the team? And correcting any inequities in racial balance by edict instead of qualifications?

That only perpetuates the perception that the black person doesn't have to perform as well to make the team, to get the job, tomerit raises, promotions, bonuses, etc That he doesn't have to qualify using the same criteria used for white people. That has to be so frustrating for those black people who do qualify and earned everything they have but that cloud of suspicion still hangs over their heads..

The "White Privilege" of which McWhorter speaks acknowledges that we haven't subjected white people to Affirmative Action and so nobody questions that the average white guy earned his position on merit. Nobody ever suspects that he is there as the mandatory 'token'. Our efforts to correct past wrongs with black people did break down barriers back in the 1960's and 70's. But to continue them now is actually disadvantaging black people in just the way McWhorter described.

Personal anecdote.

I provide my customers with swimsuit calendars every year. I have had no less than 6 former customers ( a small percentage, but not zero ) who have refused the calendar because one of the models was black.

Do you understand the implications of that? It means that we have not achieved the goal. There are still barriers to straight up equality. If we permitted it, those business owners would hire only white people.......period. There is a percentage of American business owners who need to be forced to treat all Americans equally. Therefore...we have not moved beyond the need for some legal recourse for those who have been discriminated against.

I don't buy the idea that "those black people people who do qualify and earned everything they have but that cloud of suspicion still hangs over their heads" are frustrated. They have lived the life. They know the score.

Take this guy, for example:

I taught my black kids that their elite upbringing would protect them from discrimination. I was wrong. - The Washington Post

He earned everything he has. He's still not feeling equal.

When does this debate end with a concession? Never?

So WHY did those customers object to the black model?

And how is McWhorter wrong that some of the very concepts that are intended to deal with racism are perpetuating attitudes that lead to more racism and discrimination?

Former customers.

Why? Why do you think?

Is this where we enter the spiral of never ending questions?

 

[Derideo_Te]

Thank you for proving my point.

You might not have intended to be racist but you used racist terminology. Does that make you a racist? Not necessarily. It just means that you are unaware that you are using racist terminology.

If you want to have an honest discussion then you have to be prepared to examine yourself and how you appear to others by what you post.

If my statements have put you on the defensive then no, we won't have an honest discussion because you will simply defend what you posted and claim that it isn't biased when it clearly is biased.

In order for there to be an open discussion no one can be above legitimate criticism.

Are you willing to do that?

Are you willing to defend the racism inherent in this question? Or can you admit that it is racially biased?

View attachment 37958

If instead you deflect and claim that others have asked the same question then you are defending the inherent racist bias in your question.

That is how it works.

The OP is not about criticism of Derideo_te or Foxfyre or anybody else. The OP invites a discussion of racism as specifically related to the concept of white privilege as McWhorter portrays it in his essay.

I will insist that we focus on that with the understanding that it is impossible to have a discussion of racism without using terminology related to racism.. If you wish a different discussion, I will invite you to start your own thread with my blessings.

Any statement made by any member, including me, posting in this thread is fair game to be questioned for clarification, argued with, criticized, or rebutted and everybody who disagrees should give that their best shot. But criticism of the member making the statement or analyzing whether the member is or is not racist or defensive or any other comments on his/her character is ad hominem and expressly disallowed in Rule #2 for the thread.

In which case report it as an ad hom!

You were asked to defend just one of the biased questions in your OP.

Either you defend it or tacitly admit that you have no intention of honestly dealing with the legitimate criticism of your own OP.

Your choice.

Perhaps if you restate the question your are concerned about and explain why it is racist, then I would have a chance to rebut that.

If you are going to say that just asking people whether they do or do not agree with a statement about racism is in itself racist, you're going to have to explain how that is racist too if you wish for me to rebut it. Because I say it is in no way racist.

You are going to have to be specific about what you find objectionable about the OP before anybody can know what you are objecting to. Just saying it is racist without saying why or how it is racist just doesn't cut it.

That's how it works.

View attachment 37965

Do you honestly believe that there is nothing racist in stating "Black people are unable to achieve equality without government programs"?

Is that specific enough for you?

I definitely believe it is not a racist statement. So explain to me why it is. But remember, we already have posts by some on this thread that are specific that federal programs are necessary to help black people because of the wrongs the black people incurred. If those programs are not necessary to help black people achieve equality with white people, then why have them?

The statement implies that blacks are inferior and cannot compete without government assistance. That is racist because it is based on the race of the people concerned.

That is was even necessary to explain says volumes.

The need for affirmative action (AA) is to redress the imbalance caused by racist laws that treated blacks as second class citizens for generations. The reason for still needing AA today is because there are whites in this nation who screech "wealth redistribution" whenever they perceive that "my money" is being spent to ensure that others who are less fortunate are provided with the basics like food and housing.

Who was it that used that "my money" phrase in another thread recently? Let me see if I can find that post. Since you referenced posts by others you can't object if I link/quote that post here, right?