Skip to main content

View Diary: "If I Were a Poor Black Kid" BUT YOU'RE NOT!! (330 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  "Black supremacy?" Seriously!? (0+ / 0-)

    The problem is that the questioning you speak of is by its very nature illegitimate.

    If you want to assist minority groups in addressing their circumstances, they are the ones who explain their experiences and circumstances, not the other way around. You can deem yourself helper of the oppressed and pontificate to the oppressed all you want; you will never come up with a concept that has any useful meaning to them.

    It has to be a mutual effort and the starting point is the members of that group explaining what they desire and face.

    •  Shorter Pizzuti - "It's true because I say so!" (0+ / 0-)

      A tumbrel remark is an unguarded comment by an uncontrollably rich person, of such crass insensitivity that it makes the workers and peasants think of lampposts and guillotines. ~ Christopher Hitchens

      by The Werewolf Prophet on Wed Dec 14, 2011 at 02:11:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  When speaking about one's identity (0+ / 0-)

        it is generally expected that it is indeed the case.

        I'm white but I'm with PoC describing their own experiences on this one, in addition to the fact that statistical and other obvious realities support the concept of white privilege.

        •  Trouble is, they're not JUST speaking about ... (0+ / 0-)

          ... their own identities, but that of whites as well. Accepting the opinion of whites that support the idea of white privilege while insisting that no white person EVAH can critique the notion proves my point - it's true because they say so.

          A tumbrel remark is an unguarded comment by an uncontrollably rich person, of such crass insensitivity that it makes the workers and peasants think of lampposts and guillotines. ~ Christopher Hitchens

          by The Werewolf Prophet on Wed Dec 14, 2011 at 03:38:10 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  ... (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Lost and Found

            You're not critiquing the notion of white privilege, you just don't like to be told that it exists.

            "Math is a theory, so it's not taught in the Bible."

            by lcj98 on Wed Dec 14, 2011 at 07:38:00 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Actualy (0+ / 0-)

              Hes critiquing the idea of not being able to critique the idea of white privilege.

              Its an abstract idea but it seems pretty clear that was what he was doing.

              But if you want to go to that debate I will take you up on that kinda half heartily. Race is more or less a non issue in modern work places and I feel that any kind of race based work policies should be abolished.   Unemployment is much much more closely linked with class than with race as the following two links will show you.

              http://www.bls.gov/...

              http://curiouscapitalist.blogs.time.com/...

              The majority of the difference in racial statistics can be accounted for via class based breakdowns for different ethnic groups. Leading me to the conclusion that race is by no longer a driving force in the workplace.

              •  but as counter examples (0+ / 0-)

                there are also the studies showing that resumes with traditional black names are given interviews less often than the identical resume with a traditional white name.  Given the blind nature of that test, I find it a very useful one.

                I think that in many modern workplaces race is not really an issue, but I think we are  along way from saying that that is true across the board.

                •  Bah (0+ / 0-)

                  If you mean traditional African names than they sound foreign which I believe also have the same rates (all foreign sounding names I believe has the same status)  . And  if you mean "American Black" names those are more a show of a lack of education and low social class of the parents which can easy be linked back to my point....and they sound foreign.  

                  •  wow (0+ / 0-)

                    I am sorry but I have to respond to this.  Yes the studies in question used American black names

                    1) those names are not necessarily any more low class or uneducated than any other.  In fact often they may just represent an empowered claiming of identity
                    2) so what if they were?  Do we think it is acceptable to deny employment because their parents we not well educated?  I think not
                    3) why on earth should, say, an honor student from brown be denied employment because they have the "wrong" name.   I thought we at least paid looser vice to the idea that achievement and ability should matter.  

                    I find your response pretty deplorable

                  •  The idea of "racism" (0+ / 0-)

                    can include where racism intersects with classism, jeez.

                    That's part of "white privilege."

                    Poor and white - gain sympathy.
                    Poor and black - gain ire.

                    White and lose your home - sympathy.
                    Black and lose your home - they blame you.

                    White and grew up poor, became successful - brilliant American Dream story.
                    Black and grew up poor, became successful - "OMG IT MUST HAVE BEEN BECAUSE OF AFFIRMATIVE ACTION."

                    White and grew up poor, became successful, express concern for those still poor - "Philanthropist who gives back."
                    Black and grew up poor, became successful, expresses concern for those who are still poor - "Reverse Racist."

                    All examples of white privilege.

          •  There has been a lot of work done (0+ / 0-)

            to make this concept more accessible and understandable, which you are out of the loop on.

            Here's a starting-point:

            http://derailingfordummies.com/...

    •  questioning is always legitimate (0+ / 0-)

      If you have closed yourself off to that, you are in deep trouble.  Otherwise, how will you ever come to examine what you think?

      •  That's accurate, and exactly why privilege matters (0+ / 0-)

        The problem is the track record of white people questioning "white privilege."

        It's not being done to examine what white people think - it's being done to protect what white people think. It's done to undermine any reported experiences of bias from non-white people.

        If white people want to weigh in on racism they MUST first acknowledge that they are on the "winning" end of the skin color spectrum - the side that has the privilege of rarely having to think about race or address it if they don't want to. The side that can slip away from conversations about race. The side that can blend in when it comes to race. That acknowledgment is what "white privilege" language is intended to do.

        A lot of white people decide to weigh in and say "hey I was still poor." That's a fair statement to analyze the playing field between white people with working-class backgrounds and people with rich backgrounds.

        It's possible for a black and white person to enter a conversation where the white person acknowledges white privilege and the black person acknowledges class privilege if she/he grew up wealthy. And it doesn't come with an automatic assumption of which kind of privilege was MORE advantageous - you don't even ask that, it always just ends up  undermining people trying to explain their own insights about their own experiences.

        But none of these things discount and challenge white privilege. White privilege IS the means by which white people examine what they think.

        •  This ought to be uncontroversial (0+ / 0-)
          If white people want to weigh in on racism they MUST first acknowledge that they are on the "winning" end of the skin color spectrum - the side that has the privilege of rarely having to think about race or address it if they don't want to.... That acknowledgment is what "white privilege" language is intended to do.

          the resistance you see though is when it gets turned from a "whites are better off" or "whites get treated better" statement into a "because of those, you don't get an opinion" statement, which happens with distressing regularity on these pages.

          But yes, questioning the existence of white privilege as a basic notion is like questioning the existence of the US or something else equally obvious

          •  "This ought to be uncontroversial" ... (0+ / 0-)

            but once again, track record.

            •  no, certainly (0+ / 0-)

              I think one thing that might be worth recognizing, or helpful to keep in mind, is that for many of us, this notion is so fundamentally obvious that we move quickly to other subtopics in discussion.  That might be an error to do that.  I mean for my part the problem of white privilege is one of the fundamental core issues that progressivism is grounded on.  I really can't see how you can be progressive and deny it, any more than I can see how you can be progressive and turn around and argue that income inequality or environmental damage isn't an issue.

              One thing I can become unaware of (and don't really have a good handle on) is how widespread privilege denialism actually is.  I've certailny seen it here, but not super commonly.

              •  I'm sorry, I confused you (0+ / 0-)

                with other commenters on the thread who were denying the notion of white privilege. Was reading the comments one at a time as I was notified of them, not noticing that the username they were coming from had changed.

                I think questioning white privilege is extremely common. As for self-described "progressives," I think they acknowledge that white people have the advantage in society, but don't all accept the intellectual concept of "privilege" arguing that you take privilege with you everywhere you go.

                The argument I hear is that racism is all the Republicans fault, liberals are never part of the problem. In a context of, say, a white-dominated university, they'll say there is no white privilege in that specific location because universities are so liberal. Or in the context of, say, disrespectful cultural appropriation - say a group of hippies is engaging in an all-white "Indian Drum Circle," they'll say they are trying to honor that culture, regardless of the American Indians who are telling them that what they are doing doesn't even look like the Native event the white kids think they are mimicking.

                Across the board, I hear many progressives acknowledging that racism exists, but saying that "minorities are too sensitive" about it, or that their advocates are going "too far," as if it's the white person's role to tell a person of color the exact level of frustration that is appropriate.

                Otherwise, I frequently hear independents AND Democrats who do not identify as "progressive" lamenting "reverse racism" and citing all the ways they did not get what they want because it was handed to a black person.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site