White Privilege

  • Thread starter Earth
  • 1,707 comments
  • 79,082 views
Might be a crazy idea, but if you're repeatedly trying to move a conversation to another thread... maybe just move it to that other thread? Could save the repeated posts of "not in this thread."
 
Grabs popcorn.... Got the Alt right and SJW going at it. I've never experience racism but I've experience prejudice. Economics today contribute quite a bit in our social structure of stereotyping.
 
DR_MOJO91
Economics today contribute quite a bit in our social structure of stereotyping.
Click to expand...

f03b7a16467026566df48d5447237823.jpg
 
Danoff
Heh... no. But it's not a discussion for this thread.



Heh... no. But it's not a discussion for this thread.



Libertarian Party.
Click to expand...

Danoff
Ok, lemme guess. People who understand economics, government, and human rights think Marxism is evil and will fail. People who don't understand those things think capitalism doesn't take into account human nature. Did I win?

Capitalism can't ignore human nature, it is human nature. It's a description of human nature. It's not a system of economics so much as it is economics.
Click to expand...

Danoff
Did I claim to be an authority? Once again, this is not the thread for this discussion. If it seems like I'm trying not to have the discussion here, that's because I'm trying not to have the discussion here.
Click to expand...

I can see you not wanting to derail the thread and I'll accept that.
But I've boldend the parts where you made the argupent from authority (someone else then yours but still authority) and I've boldend thz part where yoy replied no when @PocketZeven said marxism isn't inherently evil. Thus implying marxism is inherrently evil.

If you don't want to have a discussion about it in this thread then not making statements like 'this philosophy is inherently evil' would be a way more efficient way to go about.

If you just want to throw out statements in a thread to only be challenged in an other thread seems rather unfair as your statement without a rebuttal would be on this page which get's awefully close to propaganda for your opinion.

I don't mean that's your intention but that's the end result none the less.


DR_MOJO91
Grabs popcorn.... Got the Alt right and SJW going at it. I've never experience racism but I've experience prejudice. Economics today contribute quite a bit in our social structure of stereotyping.
Click to expand...

I think the alt-right label doesn't really fit @Danoff whom I consider to be more of a classical liberal from the little interaction we've had (danoff correct me if wrong).
I also don't think I should be considered a SJW as I haven't reported a post of someone just because it's offensive. Which I think is the regressive part of SJW's, the need to suppres idea's they find unacceptable.
 
Mr Tree
I can see you not wanting to derail the thread and I'll accept that.
But I've boldend the parts where you made the argupent from authority (someone else then yours but still authority)
Click to expand...

Whose authority was I arguing from?

Mr Tree
and I've boldend thz part where yoy replied no when @PocketZeven said marxism isn't inherently evil. Thus implying marxism is inherrently evil.

If you don't want to have a discussion about it in this thread then not making statements like 'this philosophy is inherently evil' would be a way more efficient way to go about.
Click to expand...

Really? Because "no" seems shorter and more to the point. It means "I disagree", and it doesn't invite the actual discussion to take place here.


Mr Tree
If you just want to throw out statements in a thread to only be challenged in an other thread seems rather unfair as your statement without a rebuttal would be on this page which get's awefully close to propaganda for your opinion.
Click to expand...

This is life. People throw out random incorrect statements all the time, at the workplace, in a starbucks, at a dinner party, and while monitoring kids at the playground. Imagine someone just blurts out "well of course the earth is flat" and moves on not expecting to be challenged. There is a human psychological response to assess how many people are sitting around listening to that statement and what their reactions are. If nobody challenges the speaker, the audience is assumed to be in favor of their statements. This is the brainwashing technique used in church. Nobody is allowed to argue with the sermon, and the congregation then lends credibility to the sermon by not doing so. They're even invited to all in unison make statements that tacitly agree such as "amen", further reinforcing the notion in each member's mind that the congregation agrees with the statement.

It is often the wrong moment to get into a debate. And while at work, at the park, or in church is usually the wrong time to do it (also when you're in the wrong thread). But it is still important to make it clear that you don't agree so that the statement carries less weight with those around you. When someone spouts nonsense, you can say "I disagree, but now is not the right time to get into it" to make it clear to everyone around you that this person does not have a uniformly receptive audience. Other times it might be necessary to just get up and leave, like at church. Actually that's always the best thing to do at church, leave the church.

It is exactly fair to make a single, short, clear counter response to each nonsense aside made. That's 1 for 1. He makes a nonsense statement, I make a statement of disagreement. Fair. Not fair would be derailing the thread into an off-topic debate - which clouds the threads and makes it difficult to search for discussions that one is interested in. It also helps keep the context of past discussion on the topic with the topic.

We're having a nice discussion about these statements in the human rights thread, which is an appropriate place for it.

Edit:

And it would be fair for someone to quote my religious attacks here and say "No, you're wrong, I disagree. And this is not the right thread for it."
 
Mr Tree
Also wondering about the white genocide claim. I haden't yet heard of it until now, where do I find this so I can read up on it?
Click to expand...
I'd be surprised if there wasn't a Wikipedia article on the subject to give you more info on it. Basically, it's a term that racist lowlifes (neo-nazis and the like) use to describe the phenomenon that people are becoming increasingly less racist when picking romantic partners.
 
My brother works at a train yard here in southern California. We're mixed white-filipino. He's been there about a decade and always complains about most(not all) of his coworkers being lazy and dodging tasks. Every now and then contracts are exchanged and the yard changes hands between different companies, so everyone has to go through interviews and rehiring processes. This is going on right now through September.

He has seniority over everyone else on his shift and works his ass off, and he said most of the other guys were trying to botch their interviews and tests so they wouldn't get hired and could walk away with severance pay. Despite this, everyone else got hired with the new company and were offered greater starting wages than him. I joked about it being due to our last name and he responded saying that the only other offer that was lower than his was the only other white guy in the group. Now I can't vouch for the entire country, but from what I've seen and where I've been this whole "white privilege" idea seems like bull.

It sucks seeing people get screwed over regardless of gender or color. Forcefully tipping the scales the other way doesn't let us move on.
 
UnkaD
Now I can't vouch for the entire country, but from what I've seen and where I've been this whole "white privilege" idea seems like bull.

It sucks seeing people get screwed over regardless of gender or color. Forcefully tipping the scales the other way doesn't let us move on.
Click to expand...

This is sort of the problem with it as a concept. However correct it might be in general terms, that doesn't mean a thing when it comes to the individual. As such, the attempt to guilt trip white people purely based on their having been born white is not only remarkably against the idea of judging people on their individual merits or situation, it's remarkably against the idea of not judging people based on their skin colour.

Funny how in the end very few people manage to avoid becoming exactly what they were fighting against.
 
Mr Tree
@novcze you still haven't answered my question.

In what way is a white genocide proposed as a solution against white priveledge? I haven't seen this yet.
Click to expand...

Even if everyone is the same colour on earth, bad people will find a way to blame his problems on a certain minority. Next in line after ethnicity is country of origin, religion, neighbourhood etc.
 
Mr Tree
@novcze you still haven't answered my question.

In what way is a white genocide proposed as a solution against white priveledge? I haven't seen this yet.
Click to expand...

Some in this thread said that white privilege is a problem and some said there is a solution, I was asking for the solution that doesn't require change in racial demography and word genocide was used as hyperbole (followed by some smiley). Do you have one? :lol:
 
novcze
Some in this thread said that white privilege is a problem and some said there is a solution, I was asking for the solution that doesn't require change in racial demography and word genocide was used as hyperbole (followed by some smiley). Do you have one? :lol:
Click to expand...

But we don't have to willfully change demographics. Demographics change over time on their own.
 
novcze
you-dont-say.gif


I suppose "we" are open borders advocates. :lol:
Click to expand...

Depends on what you mean with open borders now doesn't it?

Like what has your post contributed to our conversation? You just accused me of something you don't know I want just because I wouldn't close my borders for everyone and would still help out the people that need it. On top of that we got here through white genocide so i'm wondering who is orchestrating this genocide and with what goal?
Because you seem to say people propose this as a solution. So you're implying its a demographic change that's been put in motion by someone.
 
Last edited:
VolkswagenX
It's directed ate any person who believes white privilege is a thing and that have a problem with it. What is the solutions to white privilege?
Click to expand...

Why do we even call this "white privilege" anyway? Wouldn't "majority privilege" be a better name for it? Along with "black privilege" in South Africa, "Japanese privilege" in Japan, etc, etc; they're all the same thing except for who the alleged privileged (majority) group is.
 

Latest Posts

Back