White Privilege

[Danoff]

There are so many groups in America that have it harder than other groups. So many that I belong to both groups who have it harder and are discriminated against, and groups that have it easier and are favored. The older I get, the more that is the case.

None of the myriad of "disadvantaged" groups benefit from being told they are victims and powerless. None of them are aided by asking people to stop treating them differently. The only thing someone in a disadvantaged group can do to make the world see that they are equal and good, is to show them. That's what Japanese Americans did following WWII. It is what women did during and following WWII. It's the only solution.

Black people don't exactly have an uphill Battle. Obama won the popular vote in this country twice. This is not a country of anti-black racism.

Edit:

69 million Americans voted for a black man to be president (in 2008) over a respected war hero. I wasn't one of them, and I'm not racist.

 

[Exorcet]

Blacks have far less wealth than whites, much of which is down to disparate home ownership rates. Home ownership tends to correlate with stability, both as a community and at the individual family level, and is one of the largest predictors of wealth accumulation. And when you look at the fact that blacks are denied mortgages at nearly triple the rate of whites, it's hard to see how that can be "fixed internally."

This doesn't seem like a racial issue. They can't get homes because of their financial situation. The history of blacks in the US certainly has a large influence on the people living today, but a lot of those issue have already been rectified. The lower average financial health of the black population can be considered an unfortunate handicap, but they are not actually being targeted by anything or anyone.

In much of the country, blacks face unemployment at double the rate of whites. It goes without saying that higher unemployment leads to more financial instability. When you look at the fact that blacks often miss out on callbacks and interviews because their name "sounds black," it's hard to see how that can be "fixed internally."

Name filtering is something that I would consider racism. It's irrational behavior that is happening now and has a clear existing cause. Racism on the part of people today is certainly also a factor in home ownership, but I don't see it as being the actual cause. That doesn't make the issue go away, but it does mean that we can't blame anyone for it.

 

[mustafur]

Okay, I'm very time poor right now as I'm at work but i'll try to answer as much as I can without getting statistics as that will take time that I can do later.

You have any sources for any of this? I'm especially interested in your claim that there is "less racism" today.

I shouldn't need sources for this surely, no segregation means opportunities are significantly higher, granted that is limited when most are in single parent households, but blacks are not cut off from the majority of the population in the south where most blacks in america live and where these laws still applied in the 60s.

I didn't say it was purely a financial issue; I also mentioned incarceration rates, and disproportionate arrest rates. I'd be particularly interested in hearing why you do or don't think it's okay that blacks get arrested at up to 10 times the rate whites do for the same crime.

Useless statistic without knowing crucial details such as:

- Are Blacks as a percentage more likely to live in states where Weed is illegal and criminalized?
- Are Blacks more likely to have a second offence to the weed usege that would increase likelyhood of incarceration?

- If it comes down to Private prison system being a cause do they fund political candidates at higher rates where blacks live(this could be a cause, although if they find that blacks are more likely to commit crimes it's in their financial interest to do this)?

The conversation is about realities for whites and blacks in the same country. What has the "3rd world" got to do with it? I'd also be very interested in hearing exactly which parts of any American's life resemble a "3rd world country" at this point.

I would say the US Cities that have some of the highest murder rates in the world that have a very high proportion of black population(notice how the US is the only first world nation represented here): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate

 

[huskeR32]

I shouldn't need sources for this surely, no segregation means opportunities are significantly higher, granted that is limited when most are in single parent households, but blacks are not cut off from the majority of the population in the south where most blacks in america live and where these laws still applied in the 60s.

Is it your contention that segregation is the only form racism has ever taken in this country?

Useless statistic without knowing crucial details such as:

- Are Blacks as a percentage more likely to live in states where Weed is illegal and criminalized?

That "crucial detail" was in the article I linked. You could try reading it before writing it off as "useless." The report broke the data down by state and by county. So, for example, in Cook County (Chicago), Illinois, where marijuana would be equally illegal for people of all races, blacks are arrested at more than six times the rate of whites.

- Are Blacks more likely to have a second offence to the weed usege that would increase likelyhood of incarceration?

The report focused on arrests for marijuana possession and did not include information about concurrent non-marijuana charges. It does, however mention that there were almost three times as many arrests for marijuana possession as there were for all violent crimes combined. This would suggest to me that most cases of marijuana possession are charged in isolation, and therefore concurrent non-marijuana charges do not account for the gap.

I would say the US Cities that have some of the highest murder rates in the world that have a very high proportion of black population(notice how the US is the only first world nation represented here): https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cities_by_murder_rate

I'm still not seeing what this has to do with "3rd world" countries.

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Still seeing class issues perpetrated as racism...

 

[Johnnypenso]

In much of the country, blacks face unemployment at double the rate of whites. It goes without saying that higher unemployment leads to more financial instability. When you look at the fact that blacks often miss out on callbacks and interviews because their name "sounds black," it's hard to see how that can be "fixed internally."

Even though black unemployment rates are at their lowest rate in history, they are still much higher than whites. However, blacks also have, on average, lower education levels, and also tend to live in poorer neighbourhoods where there are less opportunities, even with an equal education. Both of those factors must contribute to some of that gap. Given that the gap is currently less than 3%, and likely much less if you control for mitigating factors, it would suggest that discrimination in the hiring process is almost a statistically insignificant factor.

Since you introduced racism into the equation I'll throw up this for consideration. Presumably the decades immediately following the Civil War were incredibly racist and certainly far more racist than today. And yet, black unemployment rates did not differ significantly from white unemployment rates until 1940. Those that are aware of the history of the U.S. know this was a particularly difficult time for black people, given their freedom but very little education or marketable skills. One would think this is especially true in the South. If racism is a big factor in the hiring process surely it would have shown up back then as blatantly obvious since it was perfectly acceptable to discriminate and no laws protected black workers:

 

[mustafur]

Is it your contention that segregation is the only form racism has ever taken in this country?

No not at all, I never claimed it was the only form of racism but i certainly think it qualifies as the worst kind of racism, I did say ''Less racism''.

That "crucial detail" was in the article I linked. You could try reading it before writing it off as "useless." The report broke the data down by state and by county. So, for example, in Cook County (Chicago), Illinois, where marijuana would be equally illegal for people of all races, blacks are arrested at more than six times the rate of whites.

I'm sorry about that, I did say I didn't have much time to respond and I rushed so I didn't have time to look at the links you provided, I do have some questions regarding those statistics though that have a big factor in arrests and don't get clarified.

- We don't have any information on the quantity of Marijuana in possession, even though in one study they showed that Massachusetts decriminalised small amounts of possession the share of arrests went up with blacks compared to whites(suggesting atleast in that state Blacks are more likely to have larger quantities).

- Whites have significantly higher incomes it would be a better detailed study to compare Whites of similar income levels if we want to focus on Racism(So for example: Rich Whites vs Rich Blacks and Poor Whites vs Poor Blacks).

The report focused on arrests for marijuana possession and did not include information about concurrent non-marijuana charges. It does, however mention that there were almost three times as many arrests for marijuana possession as there were for all violent crimes combined. This would suggest to me that most cases of marijuana possession are charged in isolation, and therefore concurrent non-marijuana charges do not account for the gap.

But as stated above the Massachusetts study gives an outlook that suggests that blacks are more likely to possess more Marijuana as when they stopped arresting people for small quantities in 2009 the Black proportion of arrests almost doubled.

I'm still not seeing what this has to do with "3rd world" countries.

Cities that are leading in most cases of Murder rates in the world wouldn't be what I would classify as a Safe First world country, but Each to their own I guess.

 

[huskeR32]

Since you introduced racism into the equation I'll throw up this for consideration. Presumably the decades immediately following the Civil War were incredibly racist and certainly far more racist than today. And yet, black unemployment rates did not differ significantly from white unemployment rates until 1940. Those that are aware of the history of the U.S. know this was a particularly difficult time for black people, given their freedom but very little education or marketable skills. One would think this is especially true in the South. If racism is a big factor in the hiring process surely it would have shown up back then as blatantly obvious since it was perfectly acceptable to discriminate and no laws protected black workers:

Interesting numbers, definitely would not have guessed that the gap was essentially nonexistent at that time. My first thought is to wonder how much black "employment" consisted of sharecropping. By today's standards, that would not be considered employment, and the system allowed a lot of exploitation and price manipulation by the wealthy landowners who lent their land out. If that figure indeed includes sharecropping (and I'm betting it does, as the sudden appearance of the gap around 1940 largely coincides with the end of sharecropping), then it would appear to be a largely mythical notion than whites and blacks had similar employment prospects during that time.

And yes, I know that there were also white sharecroppers. But one source puts the numbers at 36% of white farmers being sharecroppers (or tenant farmers) compared to 85% of black farmers (Wikipedia, talking about Mississippi in 1900).

---

I'm sorry about that, I did say I didn't have much time to respond and I rushed so I didn't have time to look at the links you provided, I do have some questions regarding those statistics though that have a big factor in arrests and don't get clarified.

Quite alright, I've done the same myself.

- We don't have any information on the quantity of Marijuana in possession, even though in one study they showed that Massachusetts decriminalised small amounts of possession the share of arrests went up with blacks compared to whites(suggesting atleast in that state Blacks are more likely to have larger quantities).

The report focuses on arrests for marijuana possession, not possession with intent to distribute, which is the charge usually levied when the perpetrator has large quantities.

Whites have significantly higher incomes it would be a better detailed study to compare Whites of similar income levels if we want to focus on Racism(So for example: Rich Whites vs Rich Blacks and Poor Whites vs Poor Blacks).

I'm not sure what that would have to do with it. Care to elaborate?

But as stated above the Massachusetts study gives an outlook that suggests that blacks are more likely to possess more Marijuana as when they stopped arresting people for small quantities in 2009 the Black proportion of arrests almost doubled.

Or, now that police had a little more wiggle room to decide what did and did not look like a "small quantity," they could more selectively decide when and who to arrest.

That interpretation is, of course, just as speculative as yours. But I'm just not buying it that with millions of data points proving the gap, that it all comes down to "black people carry more weed." What, in your mind, would be the mechanism behind that? Because again, if your answer is that they're more likely to be selling it, then you'd see more charges for intent to distribute.

Cities that are leading in most cases of Murder rates in the world wouldn't be what I would classify as a Safe First world country, but Each to their own I guess.

You're conflating "3rd world" with "safe." They're two different things. Compare the way of life in any modern American city to, say, much of Africa, and you'll find two very different realities. Safety is one small part of that. If you want to talk about violence issues in the US, and how they might be intertwined with race, fine. But let's leave the hyperbole at the door.

Thanks for taking the time to answer my questions in more depth.

 

[Rallywagon]

This video seems pretty relevant right at this moment in this thread.

 

[Johnnypenso]

Part 1 to above:

 

[PocketZeven]

I have been doing some reading about the supposed "racial wealth gap". I came accros an interesting mini doc by vox on Netflix:
https://www.vox.com/2018/5/23/17377084/racial-wealth-gap-explained-netflix

Where I also personally think that financial succes has some corrolation with ethnic backgrounds this doc gave me a new perspective on wage gap between the black community and white in the USA.

 

[Johnnypenso]

I have been doing some reading about the supposed "racial wealth gap". I came accros an interesting mini doc by vox on Netflix:
https://www.vox.com/2018/5/23/17377084/racial-wealth-gap-explained-netflix

Where I also personally think that financial succes has some corrolation with ethnic backgrounds this doc gave me a new perspective on wage gap between the black community and white in the USA.

Did you watch the two videos above as well?

 

[PocketZeven]

Did you watch the two videos above as well?

Nope. Not yet. Did you watch the netflix episode? It is more of an explanation of how the wealth gap came to be. If the former slave community deserve reparation is an interesting convorsation. I personally see the legitimacy in it as backwages for services provided.

 

[BobK]

If the former slave community deserve reparation is an interesting convorsation. I personally see the legitimacy in it as backwages for services provided.

A compelling argument could be made for reparations for former slaves. However I see no justification whatsoever for the descendants of former slaves to receive reparations. Furthermore I see no reason why people who didn't own slaves, much less their dependents, should be liable for said reparations.

 

[PeterJB]

A compelling argument could be made for reparations for former slaves. However I see no justification whatsoever for the descendants of former slaves to receive reparations. Furthermore I see no reason why people who didn't own slaves, much less their dependents, should be liable for said reparations.

A tiny percentage of white Americans alive today are descended from slave owners anyway. Not many people owned slaves, and the few that did only had one or two because they were so expensive.

 

[Imari]

If the former slave community deserve reparation is an interesting convorsation. I personally see the legitimacy in it as backwages for services provided.

But you don't get paid for the services that your grandfather provided. And I don't pay you for the services that your grandfather performed for Tony Wannaburger down the road.

Whatever legitimacy there may have once been (forty acres and a mule?), the people that are alive today are way too far removed from the source to make this reasonable. On both sides.

 

[PocketZeven]

But you don't get paid for the services that your grandfather provided. And I don't pay you for the services that your grandfather performed for Tony Wannaburger down the road.

Whatever legitimacy there may have once been (forty acres and a mule?), the people that are alive today are way too far removed from the source to make this reasonable. On both sides.

Most people inherit money, property, assets etc. Did you guys watch the episode at all? I am not advocating reparations, but it is a legitimate explanation on why the stereotype of black people living in poverty is essentially true.

I agree that it is way too late for any reparations for the current generation. But the current generation of slave descendants still suffer the consequences of the wealth gap.

 

[Northstar]

Most people inherit money, property, assets etc.

Most people don't inherit anything substantial if anything at all. Of course over the years family lines get so convoluted you would likely have people going after themselves for reparations.

But the current generation of slave descendants still suffer the consequences of the wealth gap.

It's been well over 100 years since slavery was abolished, at what point is it time to hold present day people accountable for their situation?

 

[Dennisch]

Most people inherit money, property, assets etc.

I would love to see a source for that, since pretty much everyone around me aren't getting any better in life when their old folks are pushing up daisies.

 

[Imari]

Most people inherit money, property, assets etc. Did you guys watch the episode at all? I am not advocating reparations, but it is a legitimate explanation on why the stereotype of black people living in poverty is essentially true.

I'm sorry, I didn't realise that there was required work before replying to a random person on the internet.

You said something. I pointed out why it wasn't a good idea. If your video also outlined why it wasn't a good idea, then maybe you shouldn't have said it. As far as limited reparations being paid back in the day being part of the cause for black people being relatively poor, well duh. I don't need Youtube to tell me that one, but that has nothing to do with what I posted. Reparations now are a dumb idea.

As far as not advocating reparations, you sure are. Read the post that I replied to. That's advocacy for reparations. If you didn't mean that, you wrote the wrong thing.

I agree that it is way too late for any reparations for the current generation. But the current generation of slave descendants still suffer the consequences of the wealth gap.

So? If it's too late for reparations why bring it up? Why not discuss something that might be an actual solution instead of this...

If the former slave community deserve reparation is an interesting convorsation. I personally see the legitimacy in it as backwages for services provided.

...which is straight up advocating consideration of paying reparations as a solution. That post does not make it clear that you're aware that reparations are not a viable solution, quite the opposite. Hence why I replied the way I did. You demonstrated ignorance and I felt that it should be corrected.

You wanted to discuss whether the "former slave community" deserve reparations? They do not.

Slavery was nominally abolished in 1865 in the US, 153 years ago. Even accounting for slavery probably continuing in secret in a few instances well beyond that, I doubt there's even that many people left now whose grandparents were slaves. Most are likely between three and eight generations removed from slavery.

Sometimes it's simply not feasible to correct historical injustices.

 

[Dennisch]

I'm pretty sure some of my ancestors suffered under the reign of Genghis Kahn. When will the Mongolians bring me the money I deserve?

 

[Blitz24]

I'm pretty sure some of my ancestors suffered under the reign of Genghis Kahn. When will the Mongolians bring me the money I deserve?

When they find money to give you and are feeling generous. So, approximately...... never?

 

[Imari]

I'm pretty sure some of my ancestors suffered under the reign of Genghis Kahn. When will the Mongolians bring me the money I deserve?

My great to the n-th power grand-mollusc was exploited and enslaved by the arthropods. This has led directly to my difficulties within human society only 400 million years later. I expect compensation and a formal apology from the arthropodian descendants within the week.

Frankly, I'm surprised it took them so long to recognise and correct this egregious wrong.

When they find money to give you and are feeling generous. So, approximately...... never?

 

[Blitz24]

My great to the n-th power grand-mollusc was exploited and enslaved by the arthropods. This has led directly to my difficulties within human society only 400 million years later. I expect compensation and a formal apology from the arthropodian descendants within the week.

Frankly, I'm surprised it took them so long to recognise and correct this egregious wrong.

Hah, jokes on you. He's as likely to get anything from the Mongols as I am getting anything from the Romans.

 

[Imari]

Hah, jokes on you. He's as likely to get anything from the Mongols as I am getting anything from the Romans.

 

[PocketZeven]

I'm sorry, I didn't realise that there was required work before replying to a random person on the internet.

You said something. I pointed out why it wasn't a good idea. If your video also outlined why it wasn't a good idea, then maybe you shouldn't have said it. As far as limited reparations being paid back in the day being part of the cause for black people being relatively poor, well duh. I don't need Youtube to tell me that one, but that has nothing to do with what I posted. Reparations now are a dumb idea.

As far as not advocating reparations, you sure are. Read the post that I replied to. That's advocacy for reparations. If you didn't mean that, you wrote the wrong thing.



So? If it's too late for reparations why bring it up? Why not discuss something that might be an actual solution instead of this...



...which is straight up advocating consideration of paying reparations as a solution. That post does not make it clear that you're aware that reparations are not a viable solution, quite the opposite. Hence why I replied the way I did. You demonstrated ignorance and I felt that it should be corrected.

You wanted to discuss whether the "former slave community" deserve reparations? They do not.

Slavery was nominally abolished in 1865 in the US, 153 years ago. Even accounting for slavery probably continuing in secret in a few instances well beyond that, I doubt there's even that many people left now whose grandparents were slaves. Most are likely between three and eight generations removed from slavery.

Sometimes it's simply not feasible to correct historical injustices.

Ignorance is when you interpet a post incorrectly.

My point was acknowledging the wealth gap as a result of slavery. You all make valid points, but you misunderstood my post and want to make clear I may have worded it to seem I was advocating it as the decendants deserving it. I only stated there is legitimacy in the claim for the reasons stated in the video. Did you even watched it at all? I am not a US citizen or even black, why would I be advocating for it?

Realize that at the most the USA is only 3-4 generations of people between us and the founding of the USA! 153 years is only 2 generations between you and the abolishment of slavery. So that literally means your grandfather did still feel any repercussion of that time.

Lets say someone found a 200 year old treasure worth a million dollars, that according to documents is found on property that was owned by the @Imari family. Do you have legitimacy to claim to that treasure? Yes of course, but so do the current owner of the property or the one who found the treasure.

The jokes about the mongol times, roman times is inaccurate, because the descendants of slaves or slave owners in the USA could still be traced within reasonable accuracy. It wasnt that long ago guys.

I was primarily adressing the stereotype I have often heard that the racial wealth gap is caused by the black people themselves for various reasons.

 

[Dennisch]

The jokes about the mongol times, roman times is inaccurate, because the descendants of slaves or slave owners in the USA could still be traced within reasonable accuracy. It wasnt that long ago guys

Why should we hold someone accountable for the actions of people they never even met?

Edit.

My great uncle was member of the NSB during World War 2, the rest of my family was terrorised by the nazis. Do we now need to pay the Jews money because of my great uncle's actions?

 

[PocketZeven]

Why should we hold someone accountable for the actions of people they never even met?

Edit.

My great uncle was member of the NSB during World War 2, the rest of my family was terrorised by the nazis. Do we now need to pay the Jews money because of my great uncle's actions?

It entirely depends on the situation. If your great uncle made millions of stealing the wealth of jews. And your cousin enherited said wealth. I would say yes he should repay that stolen wealth in one way or another.

I found one example one example on how reparation can alternatively done:
https://www.bbc.com/news/av/magazine-22803970/slave-owner-s-descendant-gives-away-plantation

 

[Northstar]

Did you even watched it at all? I am not a US citizen or even black, why would I be advocating for it?

Funny, that doesn't seem to stop you from saying what you think the U.S. should do on pretty much every other topic.

Realize that at the most the USA is only 3-4 generations of people between us and the founding of the USA! 153 years is only 2 generations between you and the abolishment of slavery. So that literally means your grandfather did still feel any repercussion of that time.

A new generation comes along roughly every 25 years, so there's been closer to 10 generations since the U.S. became a thing and 6 since the end of slavery.

Do you have legitimacy to claim to that treasure? Yes of course, but so do the current owner of the property or the one who found the treasure.

100% of the claim belongs with the current property owner.

because the descendants of slaves or slave owners in the USA could still be traced within reasonable accuracy.

So? How does that make me responsible for something my ancestors may have done 153 years ago? Hell, how does that make me responsible for what my Great Grandma may have done in Germany during WWII?

I was primarily adressing the stereotype I have often heard that the racial wealth gap is caused by the black people themselves for various reasons.

10 years ago I was living out of a crappy hotel room I could barely afford since I had just been laid off. Fast forward to today and I'm flirting with the middle class. It's taken a long time and lots of hard work, but it's certainly possible to climb out of poverty.

 

[PocketZeven]

Funny, that doesn't seem to stop you from saying what you think the U.S. should do on pretty much every other topic.



A new generation comes along roughly every 25 years, so there's been closer to 10 generations since the U.S. became a thing and 6 since the end of slavery.



100% of the claim belongs with the current property owner.



So? How does that make me responsible for something my ancestors may have done 153 years ago? Hell, how does that make me responsible for what my Great Grandma may have done in Germany during WWII?



10 years ago I was living out of a crappy hotel room I could barely afford since I had just been laid off. Fast forward to today and I'm flirting with the middle class. It's taken a long time and lots of hard work, but it's certainly possible to climb out of poverty.

Thats called voicing an opinion. I am sorry you dont like mine.

What I clearly meant by generations, is to say there is only 3-4 people in your family between you and the time of slavery and founding of the united states.

Perhaps the current owner has the most claim in your opinion, but apparantly finders-keepers is also a thing and it isnt even settled law.
http://time.com/10118/california-gold-coins-finders-keepers-john-mary/
https://www.deconcinimcdonald.com/the-law-of-treasure-trove-or-who-gets-the-found-money/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treasure_trove

Like i concluded the finder, the current owner and the heir all have a legitimate claim to the treasure.

You are misintepreting my statements. When did I state that the descendents are directly responsible for reparations.

There is a big difference from climbing out of poverty to middle class then the established middle class with inherited assets and wealth. Please watch the episode of explained on Netflix before commenting. You clearly dont understand fully what I am referring to.