On the topic of white privilege...
|
2
points
I agree with Antrim although I must say I have known a few intelligent blacks. But as a total race in general there is no way a. Reasonable person could say there is no inherent difference in mental capacity. Just drive around Africa then drive around a continent under long term white control. It's really as obvious as the fact that more blacks make pro sports than whites - they are faster than whites. People just feel a guilt not to make a very simple conclusion In all honesty, if we take "The Man" down and replace them with [insert your favorite protected group here] they will just pick up where "The Man" left off. What needs to happen is thin "The Man" herd and move representatives of ALL the protected groups into the vacated slots. However, I suspect that doing that would create a dystopia. If every protected group is represented by a seat of power, what is there to keep the seats of power from turning against the populace? If the group is represented, then there's no need for it to remain a protected group. I mean, I guess each group can tear down their representative and replace them with someone else but.... we have that system now. Does anyone feel that their elected representative has their best interest at heart? I have a vested interest to maintain the status quo. But I have hit the proverbial glass ceiling. And I fear that if that glass ceiling were shattered and I was thrust through it up to the next level, that I would just end up becoming like the person I would be replacing. I don't want to be that person. Privileges have to be earned. Through their superior intelligence which resulted in an endless list of inventions and discoveries ranging from the jet engine to penicillin and the computer you're using, whites have earned their position of privilege. What's more suspicious than a black man running, or even walking down the street with a television under his arm? On the last set of statistics published by London's Metropolitan Police, ( before the politically correct brigade had them stopped) blacks represented 10% of the Capital's population but were responsible for 90% of all violent crime. The Blacks and their representatives complain because more blacks are stopped and searched for concealed weapons than whites. Now, why ever would the police do that? None of those innovations would have been possible without the far earlier mathematical developments of what is now the Middle-East. There are also numerous contemporary inventors who are not white. There is also no legitimate research which suggests any fundamental difference in intelligence due to race. There is, however, plentiful evidence that demonstrates the historical causes of disproportionate poverty among non-whites which is evidenced to lead to higher rates of crime. There is also evidence that whites who commit the same exact crimes as non-whites are prosecuted less often and sentenced more leniently. I suggest you study statistics, history, sociology, and law as you are evidently ill-informed of all. Given that you are presumably white, your assertion of the intellectual superiority of whites is rendered somewhat ironic. B.S., even romanticized B.S., as you've spewed out doesn't change history any more than it will change the future. In 1000 years from now white men will have developed the technology to inhabit other, ( Bongo free) planets to which the Bongo will be sending images of Bongo children dying from disease and malnutrition and begging for aid. A 'Bongo only' earth ( you know the biblical quote;- ''the meek shall inherit the earth, only it should have read;- the meek and the stupid shall inherit the earth) will be one enormous open sewer overrun with rats and Bongo murder squads. Take a look at Africa and closer to home on your own doorstep, Detroit. One of the most prosperous cities in the United States has been Bongoized and turned into a third world cesspit. You can take the Bongo out of the jungle but you cannot take the jungle out of the Bongo. 1
point
This is the way it used to be, but now it's basically the opposite. If a cisexual white man insults a women or a black person or a queer person, then they are labelled as a discriminating jerk. If a white police officer shoots a black man, then the whole African-American community blows up about it, even if the shooting was in self-defense and unavoidable. If a black police officer just blatantly shot a white person for no apparent reason, anyone who protests against it is called racist. Legally and economically, white men do have it better than everyone else, but socially, they don't. It is not "basically the opposite" because cisgender homosexual white men do not face higher rates of employment discrimination, housing discrimination, police violence, incarceration, police brutality, hate crimes, etc. Being verbally accused of being a jerk or bigot does not even begin to compare to what many actually marginalized people experience. I am not a fan of PC call out culture myself, but to suggest that the experiences are the same is frankly asinine. Being a white man means never having to speak for anybody but yourself. Except that whenever a white man does something disagreeable he is called out as being representative of all white men, and that being a white man now regularly means defending against the argument that all white men are bad because of their race and gender. I fail to see how repeating the same pattern of stereotyped assumptions is remotely productive. Even though the repercussions for white man are not nearly so egregious, these emerging attitudes are far less effective at producing positive/desired results than treating other people with a modicum of civility and non-assumption. Arguably, they are worse the ineffectual and actually harm the very ends people seek to achieve. |
