If by anti liberal propaganda, you mean Gallup polls, than yes, anti liberal propaganda does indeed put conservatives as 12% more of the population than liberals.
For the record, I believe that Gallup poll, because those numbers have been relatively steady for years on end. I have a distinct feeling that if I posted a Trump approval number from Gallup, I would be hit with at least 3 rebuttals telling me it was fake news. So which is it?? Is Gallup a reputable organization, or aren't they. Before the Election, Trump said the unemployment numbers were rigged. Apparently the instant he took office, they were no longer suspect. Which is it?? None of these things can be both at the same time.
Oh and I'll just bet that if it was the other way around and Clinton had won the election and not the popular vote you'd be shouting at the top of your lungs about how Trump should be president and we need to change the whole system because he got screwed. I sincerely doubt it. You'd be touting how visionary our founding fathers were for coming up with such a great system.
Don't put words in other people's mouths. You don't speak for @jjstraka34, @Balrog99.
Oh and I'll just bet that if it was the other way around and Clinton had won the election and not the popular vote you'd be shouting at the top of your lungs about how Trump should be president and we need to change the whole system because he got screwed. I sincerely doubt it. You'd be touting how visionary our founding fathers were for coming up with such a great system.
Don't put words in other people's mouths. You don't speak for @jjstraka34, @Balrog99.
It isn't something I care about (never has been) but thinking upon this exact subject, I simply can't envision this scenario taking place. People were talking about it before the election and it sounded like nonsense then, now even more so. Going forward into the future, I admit I would have to say "well, yeah, it's about time the other side benefited from this nonsense", but as of now that isn't what has happened. It's only happened two times in modern political history (and by modern I mean the last 100 years). Both times it benefited one party, and both times something else peripheral was also lurking in the background in ADDITION to the popular vote discrepancy (the Supreme Court and the ridiculous ballots in Florida in 2000, Russian interference in 2016, and widespread voter suppression in both cases, in States that actually mattered, mostly Florida in 2000 and Wisconsin in 2016). So sure, we can make up hypothetical situations where liberals MIGHT not have a problem with it happening if it takes place in the future. But that would be mostly because at this point it would be the attitude of "oh yeah, you don't like how it feels?? Well suck on it anyway." But it isn't going to happen, simply because the States that are firmly in the Democratic column have too large of populations for it to take place. I don't see how you can carry California, New York and basically every large city in the country, win the Electoral vote and LOSE the popular vote. The odds are very much against it. The odds of it happening to a Republican seem to be somewhere around 40% according to recent history.
If you are a Democrat at this point, looking at how elections in the US work, the thinking has to be that you are playing from behind from the time the game starts because of innate disadvantages that benefit rural (thus more Red) States. A Democratic candidate, like Ginger Rogers, has to do the same moves as Fred Astaire, but backwards and in heels.
If by anti liberal propaganda, you mean Gallup polls, than yes, anti liberal propaganda does indeed put conservatives as 11% more of the population than liberals.
No, I mean the near century of anti-communist propaganda for the easiest example. You know, the crap that leads stupid people to think losing services so a rich leech gets a tax cut if going to help improve the lot of the poor. All those services are just a crutch holding them back, right?
@Balrog99 gay bashing still happens you know, and I seem to remember one candidate during the previous election encouraging violent repression of protestors, are you just gonna pretend that **** didn't happen?? Anyways, PLENTY of liberals join peaceful protests about things like women's and minority's rights, this has obvious time costs if nothing else. Not every SJW is cpu only you know.
Does anybody care about the poor rural communities? Nobody in the Democrats, thats for sure. They would rather have people like Bernie who say you dont know what its like to be poor if you are white
Ol Bern went WAY down in pts for me when making that obnoxious statement, that and saddling up to Clinton at the end.
Does anybody care about the poor rural communities? Nobody in the Democrats, thats for sure. They would rather have people like Bernie who say you dont know what its like to be poor if you are white
Both parties don't care about rural poor voters. Democrats do a bit more because they are caring. Republicans pay more lip service to it though because they court the Religious vote.
But when the chips are down neither party is worried about Ohio or whatever seemingly.
Too much money in politics. They both work for corporations.
I was Pro Bernie at that point in time and it left a very bad taste in my mouth as well. Totally out of touch and downright insulting to many. I don't think i'd consider myself Pro Bernie anymore.
Not to hop on the bandwagon, but as a lifelong Democrat, the one thing I don't like about the American left today is the divisive rhetoric around race. I favor the party's actual policies involving race--police body cameras would make the streets safer; the protections of the Voting Rights Act are better off preserved than abandoned; "stop and frisk" policies push the police further from the people they serve; and we need smarter ways of handling crime than just issuing long jail sentences and having taxpayers foot the bill for keeping convicts locked up and out of the workforce...
...but when folks start saying that being white is a mental disadvantage? That whiteness inherently makes us ignorant, even if we grew up amongst minorities? That whiteness disqualifies us from issuing an opinion, even if we've tried to "educate ourselves?" That white people are supposed to listen and not talk when the concept of race comes up? That race is a cage in which people must be locked for all of their lives, and god forbid anyone crosses the lines or blurs the difference between black and white? That the problem of race in America is not that blacks and Hispanics are treated like crap, but that the real problem is that white people are treated like human beings? That racism is not only universal, but uncurable? That the way to eliminate discrimination is not to become color blind, but to become even more color-conscious than we already are? That all of human history, without variation, is just evil white people committing crimes against sinless nonwhite minorities, and that the future holds nothing better? That white people are villains to be defeated, rather than people to be won over with love?
Granted, I can understand why people think these things. And granted, these ideas aren't policies. The Democratic party hasn't tried to make this stuff into laws, which means that this isn't bad policy or destructive action--it's just rhetoric that happens to be grating. And as attention-grabbing as rhetoric is, policy is the thing that actually matters.
But these ideas are completely at odds with the legacy of Dr. King. Every single one contradicts his vision of a better America, shorn of its racial barriers and unified by love.
Not to hop on the bandwagon, but as a lifelong Democrat, the one thing I don't like about the American left today is the divisive rhetoric around race. I favor the party's actual policies involving race--police body cameras would make the streets safer; the protections of the Voting Rights Act are better off preserved than abandoned; "stop and frisk" policies push the police further from the people they serve; and we need smarter ways of handling crime than just issuing long jail sentences and having taxpayers foot the bill for keeping convicts locked up and out of the workforce...
...but when folks start saying that being white is a mental disadvantage? That whiteness inherently makes us ignorant, even if we grew up amongst minorities? That whiteness disqualifies us from issuing an opinion, even if we've tried to "educate ourselves?" That white people are supposed to listen and not talk when the concept of race comes up? That race is a cage in which people must be locked for all of their lives, and god forbid anyone crosses the lines or blurs the difference between black and white? That the problem of race in America is not that blacks and Hispanics are treated like crap, but that the real problem is that white people are treated like human beings? That racism is not only universal, but uncurable? That the way to eliminate discrimination is not to become color blind, but to become even more color-conscious than we already are? That all of human history, without variation, is just evil white people committing crimes against sinless nonwhite minorities, and that the future holds nothing better? That white people are villains to be defeated, rather than people to be won over with love?
Granted, I can understand why people think these things. And granted, these ideas aren't policies. The Democratic party hasn't tried to make this stuff into laws, which means that this isn't bad policy or destructive action--it's just rhetoric that happens to be grating. And as attention-grabbing as rhetoric is, policy is the thing that actually matters.
But these ideas are completely at odds with the legacy of Dr. King. Every single one contradicts his vision of a better America, shorn of its racial barriers and unified by love.
It's the end result of America CONSTANTLY kicking the can down the road on this issue until being forced to be better at the last possible moment. Slavery?? We need a nation-dividing, bloody civil war to end that. Ending segregation?? Only after a 100 years of Jim Crow and de-facto slavery in much of the South. Equal rights?? Only nominally in the mid-60s, and you can easily argue they still haven't actually been implemented. Our prison and policing system?? Nothing more than a make-shift replacement for slavery and the slave patrols of the South, to this day, designed to keep as many black people locked away and out of society as possible (and yes, it is by DESIGN). Quite honestly, I'd say there hasn't been a more understanding, forgiving, and tolerant group of people demographically in much of human history than African-Americans. They have every right to be 100x more pissed than they are (which isn't very).
And, again, in relation to what you mentioned, we are talking about actual, tangible historical events that have happened and caused the black community to be set back about two centuries from a wealth and human rights perspective versus....what exactly?? Some white people getting their feelings hurt?? People in this forum have laughed at the idea of "White Fragility", but I find it is a very real thing, and often comes from the same people who bitch constantly about the "feelings" of others, until it is their emotions being played with:
White Fragility is a state in which even a minimum amount of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves. These moves include the outward display of emotions such as anger, fear, and guilt, and behaviors such as argumentation, silence, and leaving the stress-inducing situation. These behaviors, in turn, function to reinstate white racial equilibrium. Racial stress results from an interruption to what is racially familiar. These interruptions can take a variety of forms and come from a range of sources, including:
• Suggesting that a white person’s viewpoint comes from a racialized frame of reference (challenge to objectivity);
• People of color talking directly about their racial perspectives (challenge to white racial codes);
• People of color choosing not to protect the racial feelings of white people in regards to race (challenge to white racial expectations and need/entitlement to racial comfort);
• People of color not being willing to tell their stories or answer questions about their racial experiences (challenge to colonialist relations);
• A fellow white not providing agreement with one’s interpretations (challenge to white solidarity);
• Receiving feedback that one’s behavior had a racist impact (challenge to white liberalism);
• Suggesting that group membership is significant (challenge to individualism);
• An acknowledgment that access is unequal between racial groups (challenge to meritocracy);
• Being presented with a person of color in a position of leadership (challenge to white authority);
• Being presented with information about other racial groups through, for example, movies in which people of color drive the action but are not in stereotypical roles, or multicultural education (challenge to white centrality).
Moreover:
At the same time that whites are taught to see their interests and perspectives as universal, they are also taught to value the individual and to see themselves as individuals rather than as part of a racially socialized group. Individualism erases history and hides the ways in which wealth has been distributed and accumulated over generations to benefit whites today. It allows whites to view themselves as unique and original, outside of socialization and unaffected by the relentless racial messages in the culture. Individualism also allows whites to distance themselves from the actions of their racial group and demand to be granted the benefit of the doubt, as individuals, in all cases. A corollary to this unracialized identity is the ability to recognize Whiteness as something that is significant and that operates in society, but to not see how it relates to one’s own life. In this form, a white person recognizes Whiteness as real, but as the individual problem of other “bad” white people.
@jjstraka34 That makes it sound like black people are the ONLY ones that have been wronged. What about Native Americans? That whole genocide side thing was worse than slavery, and despite America being THEIR homeland, they are at best a minority and at worst completely ignored. The topic always going to the black community and their wrongs, and staying there is in itself racist.
@jjstraka34 That makes it sound like black people are the ONLY ones that have been wronged. What about Native Americans? That whole genocide side thing was worse than slavery, and despite America being THEIR homeland, they are at best a minority and at worst completely ignored. The topic always going to the black community and their wrongs, and staying there is in itself racist.
I'm more than happy to have the same discussion about how we destroyed nearly every Native American tribe in this country, but I'm also not going to sit here and pretend like I was ignoring that on purpose when the first paragraph in @semiticgod 's post was related to the Voting Rights Act and Stop and Frisk, which overwhelming effect African-Americans in the South and in urban areas. And quite honestly, comments like this are straw men almost always used to deflect from talking about that issue. I can talk about both, but the topic went to the black community because those were the issues brought forth in the post I was responding to. I mean, go back and read some of my comments about Andrew Jackson earlier in the thread. Let's talk about how Thanksgiving and Columbus Day are basically fully government-sanctioned holidays of American genocide. I'm happy to do so.
@jjstraka34 I didn't mean to imply that you did so on purpose, but it seems that every single discussion on racism I see ALWAYS gets steered to black slavery, and then firmly remains there. Like some kind of event horizon.
@jjstraka34 I didn't mean to imply that you did so on purpose, but it seems that every single discussion on racism I see ALWAYS gets steered to black slavery, and then firmly remains there. Like some kind of event horizon.
The reason that happens is because the settlers of this country almost eliminated Native Americans entirely, to the point that today they make up only 2% of the population, and most of them were herded onto reservations where they remain to this day, with the only small caveat being that they have been granted some modicum of freedom to run those lands as they see fit. But even that means next to nothing, as alcoholism and suicide rates among this demographic are astronomical.
And this ties into the main point made when talking about African-Americans and racism as well. White Europeans killed off the people who were here, almost wholesale. They then had another race shipped in as a free labor force, and gobbled up every single ounce of the riches of this country for nearly 200 years with no competition. That kind of generational wealth, and where it went, and where it didn't go, can NEVER be rectified, and that is why these problems will always exist. Because white Americans (like myself) are, yes, too fragile and scared to deal with it's reality. They'd rather bitch about "reverse racism" which basically amounts to hearing something they don't like, or challenges their place in the world, rather than, you know, ACTUAL events that caused this situation in the first place.
@jjstraka34 Not all white Americans are too fragile or scared to deal with things. What are some suggestions on dealing with the serious and long residing issues brought up?
I have never heard the term "reverse racism before", that's a new one for me. Its a pointless term anyway, if you look down on someone because of their skin color, regardless of the reason, its racism anyway. It will never go away unless all sides get rid of the hate. No amount of "rectification" will change that.
Ironic, but I feel qualified as a rural white north american (I'm Canadian) to say that after having done actual stints of the same work migrant labourers do that us whites really don't understand on a profound level what it is to be disadvantaged the way some minorities are. The same colonial mentality exists in both american ghetto and the Caribean, and I will never forget going to a public concert with a mature black man that would not *dare* sit at a table that an unknown white woman was sitting at, because he knew of more than one man that had a bad outcome. He was Caribean, a fairly down to earth fellow with a great deal of pride, but sitting at that table was a line he *could not* cross. Even being told that in Canada it would be 100% okay could not override his programming. Imagine working long hours in a climate of fear at a job no sane NA will work at... knowing you can be fired complrtely without recourse for *any* reason at all. I suspect being in prison is the closest a white can come to the feeling of persecution that is almost 2nd nature to many blacks, where there are unwritten rules that it could cost your life to break.
I think the entire 'don't talk and just listen' thing is to get some white people to learn 2nd hand that what we think we know about race/minority persecution is the tip of the iceberg. It's not very pleasant for the 'powerful' to be told to listen, but remember, most of these people we are being told to listen to are societally voiceless. Nothing personal, but I don't think Jesse Jackson is the best voice we can find for blacks as a whole, let alone rappers etc. I'm not saying us whites have nothing to add, just that in NA we've spent 400 years telling blacks how the universe works, and I think they are tired of being talked at rather than having a true dialogue.
I don't think being colour blind is healthy... I think background is *very* important, despite being taught colour blindness is key. Cultural sensitivity is about accepting (where possible) on people's own terms, which requires a great deal of knowledge, and a big part of that knowledge is realizing that white tyranny has existed on each inhabited continent in recent history, a feat no other race has achieved. 1 continent was *depopulated* and almost completely repopulated by whites, and that happens to be the richest continent in the world, NA. I'm not saying other races would have done differently, I'm saying white people still have the power to make or break the world, and instead of helping conservatives keep getting offended, because they are so ****ing delicate. AND I AM A CONSERVATIVE SOCIALIST. Yes, we exist. I'm a pretty strict Christian even.
I don't have a clue what true equalization would look like, unless I start looking at the whites that willing turn their back on education. Thats the wrong kind of equalization though, and it only benefits the new aristocracy of the world. An aristocracy thats pretty much all white, where co-opted black celebrities are exploited as tokens, heaped with wealth and accolades to pretend black people can make it if they'd just try harder. Those people are I suspect are why Hillary was put on the ballot, because they wanted Trump to win, and damn if I can really figure out why.
I will happily listen, but the instant somebody tells me I am racist BECAUSE I am white, there is nothing of value in that conversation. Here's the rub, I have personally known people that hate white people because they are white, if someone went bankrupt just to pay off an offense that their great great great great great grandfather caused, it wouldn't change their mind. They would continue to hate as they have. Only forgiveness will end racism, anything else will simply perpetuate the prejudice.
I will happily listen, but the instant somebody tells me I am racist BECAUSE I am white, there is nothing of value in that conversation. Here's the rub, I have personally known people that hate white people because they are white, if someone went bankrupt just to pay off an offense that their great great great great great grandfather caused, it wouldn't change their mind. They would continue to hate as they have. Only forgiveness will end racism, anything else will simply perpetuate the prejudice.
White people need forgiveness I agree, but we don't seem to be trying hard enough as a whole. Individuals happen to be constructive parts of the world, but then a candidate that claims Mexicans are rapists gets elected... I doubt he was elected by minorities. It would be nice if white people weren't to be painted with a roller, let alone the same wide brush.
Imho, white people don't understand where that hate comes from, so we all take it personally rather than understanding and if possible correcting.
Irrational. But again, nowadays it seems to be a thing in entire Pars Occidentalis (US included).
People are only responsible for their own actions, not the actions of their ancestors.
It's usually not that simple, when descendants benefit from ancestors actions. Lines of responsibility become blurry at that point.
Humans are irrational, always have been, always will be.
But no, it's perfectly simple. You are responsible for your own choices, and anything you can influence, even if it's only in a very small way. You cannot choose your ancestors, you cannot choose to benefit or suffer as a result of their actions. Therefore there is no responsibility. None. Nada. Zero.
Irrational. But again, nowadays it seems to be a thing in entire Pars Occidentalis (US included).
People are only responsible for their own actions, not the actions of their ancestors.
It's usually not that simple, when descendants benefit from ancestors actions. Lines of responsibility become blurry at that point.
Humans are irrational, always have been, always will be.
But no, it's perfectly simple. You are responsible for your own choices, and anything you can influence, even if it's only in a very small way. You cannot choose your ancestors, you cannot choose to benefit or suffer as a result of their actions. Therefore there is no responsibility. None. Nada. Zero.
Hypothetical question:
Your father robbed a bank and left the money to you. Is the responsible thing to give the money back to it's rightful owners or to keep it for yourself and benefit from it?
Irrational. But again, nowadays it seems to be a thing in entire Pars Occidentalis (US included).
People are only responsible for their own actions, not the actions of their ancestors.
It's usually not that simple, when descendants benefit from ancestors actions. Lines of responsibility become blurry at that point.
Humans are irrational, always have been, always will be.
But no, it's perfectly simple. You are responsible for your own choices, and anything you can influence, even if it's only in a very small way. You cannot choose your ancestors, you cannot choose to benefit or suffer as a result of their actions. Therefore there is no responsibility. None. Nada. Zero.
Hypothetical question:
Your father robbed a bank and left the money to you. Is the responsible thing to give the money back to it's rightful owners or to keep it for yourself and benefit from it?
It doesn't matter if your father robbed a bank, you won the lottery, or you wrote a best selling series of children's novels. You are equally responsible for using what you have wisely for the good of all.
I wouldn't say you would be personally responsible for their actions, no. But I do think it would be productive to be socially responsible and at least attempt to understand where alot of the advantages a white person has come from.
As a white person, you don't generally get stopped by the police for no reason, much less on a regular basis. When you are stopped, you aren't terrified you are going to be shot. You've likely never been denied an apartment or didn't get a call back on a resume because of your name. If you are a white man, you've likely never seen a white woman cross the street to avoid you, and sensed the nervousness of a group of people when you enter an elevator. Black children are more likely to be punished more severely for committing the same infractions at school. And black children are often viewed as much as 3 to 5 years older than they actually are by law enforcement and educators.
These are the kind of day to day stresses that plague EVERY black citizen and, especially, black parent that simply don't exist for most of the rest of us.
Its awfully convenient to say "oh well, I'm not my ancestor" and take no responsibility after our ancestors got rich via abusive practices/theft. Nobody is saying we need legal repercussions for whites because of our shitty ancestors, just that we accept that we've inherited a lot of ill gotten goods, and not be so uncharitable as a people, in addition to stopping the still present exploitation and abuse.
I don't treat people differently based on their skin color or accent (though I am admittedly bad at parsing some words under thick accent), and I will teach my son to do the same. If enough people stop excluding others for poor reasons, things will improve.
You are equally responsible for using what you have wisely for the good of all.
...So if I live in the house my parents taken over after Jewish owner died during second World War, it's everything okay? Do I have any moral obligations towards descendants of the owner? Is it okay to benefit from the Shoah? I'm not making that story as I go, because there were stories like that in Poland (obviously not only concering Jews, but, for an instance, Germans from that part of Germany that became polish after WW2).
You are equally responsible for using what you have wisely for the good of all.
...So if I live in the house my parents taken over after Jewish owner died during second World War, it's everything okay? Do I have any moral obligations towards descendants of the owner? Is it okay to benefit from the Shoah? I'm not making that story as I go, because there were stories like that in Poland (obviously not only concering Jews, but, for an instance, Germans from that part of Germany that became polish after WW2).
No you don't. Everything that happened to the previous family, happened independent of your knowledge or intent. See, evil sucks, and evil actions always lead to more evil and that includes consequences that completely innocent people are left to deal with.
You are equally responsible for using what you have wisely for the good of all.
...So if I live in the house my parents taken over after Jewish owner died during second World War, it's everything okay? Do I have any moral obligations towards descendants of the owner? Is it okay to benefit from the Shoah? I'm not making that story as I go, because there were stories like that in Poland (obviously not only concering Jews, but, for an instance, Germans from that part of Germany that became polish after WW2).
My Pictish ancestors slaughtered the ninth legion 2000 years ago. 1500 years ago my viking ancestors slaughtered the helpless christian monks of Lindisfarne. We are all decended from murderers and thieves if you look back far enough.
Comments
If you are a Democrat at this point, looking at how elections in the US work, the thinking has to be that you are playing from behind from the time the game starts because of innate disadvantages that benefit rural (thus more Red) States. A Democratic candidate, like Ginger Rogers, has to do the same moves as Fred Astaire, but backwards and in heels.
@Balrog99 gay bashing still happens you know, and I seem to remember one candidate during the previous election encouraging violent repression of protestors, are you just gonna pretend that **** didn't happen?? Anyways, PLENTY of liberals join peaceful protests about things like women's and minority's rights, this has obvious time costs if nothing else. Not every SJW is cpu only you know.
But when the chips are down neither party is worried about Ohio or whatever seemingly.
Too much money in politics. They both work for corporations.
...but when folks start saying that being white is a mental disadvantage? That whiteness inherently makes us ignorant, even if we grew up amongst minorities? That whiteness disqualifies us from issuing an opinion, even if we've tried to "educate ourselves?" That white people are supposed to listen and not talk when the concept of race comes up? That race is a cage in which people must be locked for all of their lives, and god forbid anyone crosses the lines or blurs the difference between black and white? That the problem of race in America is not that blacks and Hispanics are treated like crap, but that the real problem is that white people are treated like human beings? That racism is not only universal, but uncurable? That the way to eliminate discrimination is not to become color blind, but to become even more color-conscious than we already are? That all of human history, without variation, is just evil white people committing crimes against sinless nonwhite minorities, and that the future holds nothing better? That white people are villains to be defeated, rather than people to be won over with love?
Granted, I can understand why people think these things. And granted, these ideas aren't policies. The Democratic party hasn't tried to make this stuff into laws, which means that this isn't bad policy or destructive action--it's just rhetoric that happens to be grating. And as attention-grabbing as rhetoric is, policy is the thing that actually matters.
But these ideas are completely at odds with the legacy of Dr. King. Every single one contradicts his vision of a better America, shorn of its racial barriers and unified by love.
And, again, in relation to what you mentioned, we are talking about actual, tangible historical events that have happened and caused the black community to be set back about two centuries from a wealth and human rights perspective versus....what exactly?? Some white people getting their feelings hurt?? People in this forum have laughed at the idea of "White Fragility", but I find it is a very real thing, and often comes from the same people who bitch constantly about the "feelings" of others, until it is their emotions being played with:
White Fragility is a state in which even a minimum amount of racial stress becomes intolerable, triggering a range of defensive moves. These moves include the outward display of emotions such as anger, fear, and guilt, and behaviors such as argumentation, silence, and leaving the stress-inducing situation. These behaviors, in turn, function to reinstate white racial equilibrium. Racial stress results from an interruption to what is racially familiar. These interruptions can take a variety of forms and come from a range of sources, including:
• Suggesting that a white person’s viewpoint comes from a racialized frame of reference (challenge to objectivity);
• People of color talking directly about their racial perspectives (challenge to white racial codes);
• People of color choosing not to protect the racial feelings of white people in regards to race (challenge to white racial expectations and need/entitlement to racial comfort);
• People of color not being willing to tell their stories or answer questions about their racial experiences (challenge to colonialist relations);
• A fellow white not providing agreement with one’s interpretations (challenge to white solidarity);
• Receiving feedback that one’s behavior had a racist impact (challenge to white liberalism);
• Suggesting that group membership is significant (challenge to individualism);
• An acknowledgment that access is unequal between racial groups (challenge to meritocracy);
• Being presented with a person of color in a position of leadership (challenge to white authority);
• Being presented with information about other racial groups through, for example, movies in which people of color drive the action but are not in stereotypical roles, or multicultural education (challenge to white centrality).
Moreover:
At the same time that whites are taught to see their interests and perspectives as universal, they are also taught to value the individual and to see themselves as individuals rather than as part of a racially socialized group. Individualism erases history and hides the ways in which wealth has been distributed and accumulated over generations to benefit whites today. It allows whites to view themselves as unique and original, outside of socialization and unaffected by the relentless racial messages in the culture. Individualism also allows whites to distance themselves from the actions of their racial group and demand to be granted the benefit of the doubt, as individuals, in all cases. A corollary to this unracialized identity is the ability to recognize Whiteness as something that is significant and that operates in society, but to not see how it relates to one’s own life. In this form, a white person recognizes Whiteness as real, but as the individual problem of other “bad” white people.
And this ties into the main point made when talking about African-Americans and racism as well. White Europeans killed off the people who were here, almost wholesale. They then had another race shipped in as a free labor force, and gobbled up every single ounce of the riches of this country for nearly 200 years with no competition. That kind of generational wealth, and where it went, and where it didn't go, can NEVER be rectified, and that is why these problems will always exist. Because white Americans (like myself) are, yes, too fragile and scared to deal with it's reality. They'd rather bitch about "reverse racism" which basically amounts to hearing something they don't like, or challenges their place in the world, rather than, you know, ACTUAL events that caused this situation in the first place.
I think the entire 'don't talk and just listen' thing is to get some white people to learn 2nd hand that what we think we know about race/minority persecution is the tip of the iceberg. It's not very pleasant for the 'powerful' to be told to listen, but remember, most of these people we are being told to listen to are societally voiceless. Nothing personal, but I don't think Jesse Jackson is the best voice we can find for blacks as a whole, let alone rappers etc. I'm not saying us whites have nothing to add, just that in NA we've spent 400 years telling blacks how the universe works, and I think they are tired of being talked at rather than having a true dialogue.
I don't think being colour blind is healthy... I think background is *very* important, despite being taught colour blindness is key. Cultural sensitivity is about accepting (where possible) on people's own terms, which requires a great deal of knowledge, and a big part of that knowledge is realizing that white tyranny has existed on each inhabited continent in recent history, a feat no other race has achieved. 1 continent was *depopulated* and almost completely repopulated by whites, and that happens to be the richest continent in the world, NA. I'm not saying other races would have done differently, I'm saying white people still have the power to make or break the world, and instead of helping conservatives keep getting offended, because they are so ****ing delicate. AND I AM A CONSERVATIVE SOCIALIST. Yes, we exist. I'm a pretty strict Christian even.
I don't have a clue what true equalization would look like, unless I start looking at the whites that willing turn their back on education. Thats the wrong kind of equalization though, and it only benefits the new aristocracy of the world. An aristocracy thats pretty much all white, where co-opted black celebrities are exploited as tokens, heaped with wealth and accolades to pretend black people can make it if they'd just try harder. Those people are I suspect are why Hillary was put on the ballot, because they wanted Trump to win, and damn if I can really figure out why.
Sorry for how pissy I get in this thread!
Imho, white people don't understand where that hate comes from, so we all take it personally rather than understanding and if possible correcting.
Irrational. But again, nowadays it seems to be a thing in entire Pars Occidentalis (US included).
It's usually not that simple, when descendants benefit from ancestors actions. Lines of responsibility become blurry at that point.
But no, it's perfectly simple. You are responsible for your own choices, and anything you can influence, even if it's only in a very small way. You cannot choose your ancestors, you cannot choose to benefit or suffer as a result of their actions. Therefore there is no responsibility. None. Nada. Zero.
Your father robbed a bank and left the money to you. Is the responsible thing to give the money back to it's rightful owners or to keep it for yourself and benefit from it?
The problem is with that *small way*.
As a white person, you don't generally get stopped by the police for no reason, much less on a regular basis. When you are stopped, you aren't terrified you are going to be shot. You've likely never been denied an apartment or didn't get a call back on a resume because of your name. If you are a white man, you've likely never seen a white woman cross the street to avoid you, and sensed the nervousness of a group of people when you enter an elevator. Black children are more likely to be punished more severely for committing the same infractions at school. And black children are often viewed as much as 3 to 5 years older than they actually are by law enforcement and educators.
These are the kind of day to day stresses that plague EVERY black citizen and, especially, black parent that simply don't exist for most of the rest of us.
...So if I live in the house my parents taken over after Jewish owner died during second World War, it's everything okay? Do I have any moral obligations towards descendants of the owner? Is it okay to benefit from the Shoah?
I'm not making that story as I go, because there were stories like that in Poland (obviously not only concering Jews, but, for an instance, Germans from that part of Germany that became polish after WW2).