#1 |
#2 |
#3 |
Paste this URL into an email or IM: |
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
|
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
|
What is white privilege?
Bs of highest order
Side Score: 9
|
It's a thing
Side Score: 11
|
|
2
points
It’s not bullshit. If I were at a KKK rally, I would have certain privileges that a black person wouldn’t. If I were at a BLM rally, black people would have certain privileges that I wouldn’t. The problem with the term is that it drops all context to pretend that this is a nation a systematic racism on behalf of white people, a contention for which there is no proof when context is included. Side: Bs of highest order
0
points
@Amarel The thing is that in America black people are still largely stuck in circumstances that are the result of their history of oppression. So regardless of whether they are currently being systematically oppressed on a deliberate level, they are still structurally oppressed by the structure of capitalism. There is a reason that white people are almost always the ones with fat stacks of paper, and it's not because they are just inherently better than everyone else. It's because of inheritance, and because they get to grow up in the nice neighborhoods while the black people have inherited dust for generations and are still stuck in the poverty stricken dung holes we confined them to back when the mainstream view was that they are subhuman. White privilege means that on average, white people are better off than black people from the moment they are born, not necessarily because racism is still inherent in America's social order, but because the circumstances which have been brought about by the history of racism have not been rectified. When a group of people are stripped of their identity and forced into slavery, then suddenly "freed" only to spend generations being systematically oppressed as a serf class that society still considers inferior, things don't suddenly become better just because you give them the right to vote and say "ok, you can be considered people now". Side: Bs of highest order
@Wank The thing is that in America black people are still largely stuck in circumstances that are the result of their history of oppression. No, they are largely stuck in circumstances that are partially the result of their history of oppression. There are numerous examples of both black and white people who started off very poor and ended up very wealthy. Of course these people are rare and remarkable for their accomplishments, but if race was the primary issue, there wouldn’t be any of the numerous black financial elite. The thing is that in America black people are still largely stuck in circumstances that are the result of their history of oppression. Ethnic oppression is not unique to black people. Numerous groups came through the same problematic door of being racial and cultural outsiders. Capitalism is what allows them to rise above even the dominant group. There’s a reason that Puerto Rican’s don’t make as much as Japanese Americans (who were near slaves for railroads after the civil war and put in prison camps as recently as WWII). Those same Japanese Americans make more than White Americans on average. The current issues with black America have little to do with their history of slavery and much to do with their relatively recent history of being held down by handouts since Johnson’s Great Society, before which their average income was on relative rise and after which was on the relative decline. A little more capitalism would be helpful. There is a reason that white people are almost always the ones with fat stacks of paper, and it's not because they are just inherently better than everyone else. No kidding. It’s because there are more white people in the US than other people. That means if there is a rich person, they are more likely to be white. It's because of inheritance, and because they get to grow up in the nice neighborhoods That’s the kind of racist ignorance that has become pervasive these days. Since there are more white people in the US, if you pick a random poor person (just like if you pick a random rich person), they are more likely to be white. You don’t get to grow up in a nice neighborhood because you’re white. If you grow up in a nice family, it is not because they are a particular race, and it is a greater determinant to your future success than your race is. That’s because has a greater impact on how you conduct yourself in the world, which makes all the difference in a capitalist society. black people have inherited dust for generations and are still stuck in the poverty stricken dung holes we confined them to back when the mainstream view was that they are subhuman. Oh I know. There’s all that dung in black households from all the slavery from 5 generations back….That’s fucking stupid. There are shitholes in ghettos and nice homes in ghettos. Do you know what happens to the folks who grow up in the nice homes in the ghettos? The leave. They raise generations that become the Oprah’s, Smith’s and Obama’s. These are people whose children will be identified by their blackness and equated with a ghetto by racists like you, even though they are further from that life than any lower middle class white person. White privilege means that on average, white people are better off than black people from the moment they are born Yeah? Then why is no one talking about Asian Privilege? You know they are better off than white people right? a serf class that society still considers inferior Show me the person that considers black people inferior and I’ll show you the person this society condemns. things don't suddenly become better just because you give them the right to vote and say "ok, you can be considered people now". No, not suddenly. It hasn’t happened suddenly for any oppressed group in the past. But it happens a lot slower for poor people who are given incentives to stay poor and encouraged by the state to get rid of their able bodied fathers and husbands, as our “great society” and welfare has done. Follow that up with a black person who is willing to point out this kind of shit and they will be called an “uncle tom”, which is can’t be a racist term, because it’s a democrat term. Side: It's a thing
1
point
@Amarel No, they are largely stuck in circumstances that are partially the result of their history of oppression. But it's mostly just because they are genetically stupid, right? There are numerous examples of both black and white people who started off very poor and ended up very wealthy. Yes there are, how does that disprove anything I said? Their are exceptions but the vast majority of people who are rich are rich because they are handed everything in life and most black people are handed nothing but a basketball and a crack pipe. Ethnic oppression is not unique to black people. I never said it was, you stupid hyena breathed skank. Capitalism is what allows them to rise above even the dominant group. That is just plain false. There’s a reason that Puerto Rican’s don’t make as much as Japanese Americans (who were near slaves for railroads after the civil war and put in prison camps as recently as WWII). Those same Japanese Americans make more than White Americans on average. It's because japanese people have higher IQs The current issues with black America have little to do with their history of slavery and much to do with their relatively recent history of being held down by handouts since Johnson’s Great Society, before which their average income was on relative rise and after which was on the relative decline. A little more capitalism would be helpful. I would like to see the statistics for that from an unbiased source. Forgive me for not simply believing that there is a direct correlation just because you say so. That’s the kind of racist ignorance that has become pervasive these days. Since there are more white people in the US, if you pick a random poor person (just like if you pick a random rich person), they are more likely to be white. You don't seem to understand, ever hear of "the hood" or "the ghetto" ? You know, those impoverished areas we herded the blacks into that they are still stuck in. Environment shapes behaviour to a large extent, and we created the shitty environment that keeps many black people down. You don’t get to grow up in a nice neighborhood because you’re white. That's not even what I'm saying. It just is that way on average because for generations we let the whites operate freely and kept the blacks down, and thus they have inherited an economic status, an environment and a way of perceiving things that has been carried over from the past and keeps them from being successful. If you grow up in a nice family, it is not because they are a particular race, and it is a greater determinant to your future success than your race is. There is a reason that all the ghettos are filled with black people and all the nice neighborhoods are filled with white people, it's because 100 years ago all the black people were being deliberately restricted to the ghettos and the whites had all the advantages. The thing is, you can't just expect people to magically thrive when they are in an economic situation and a mentality that has been left over from a time of abject oppression. What you don't realize is the extent to which people are shaped by their circumstances, for generations black people have been conditioned the same psychologically by the environment they're stuck in, we have created an environment which programs black people to stay in poverty, because they are raised in poverty which creates the mentality of poverty. Yeah? Then why is no one talking about Asian Privilege? Because asian American's don't have to put you in slavery for a few hundred years to get ahead. Show me the person that considers black people inferior Trump. Side: Bs of highest order
But it's mostly just because they are genetically stupid, right? It would work better for you if the words you put in my mouth were mine. But racism is for collectivists, not individualists. Yes there are, how does that disprove anything I said? It couldn’t happen for black people if society actually held them down for their race. Their are exceptions but the vast majority of people who are rich are rich because they are handed everything in life That’s factually incorrect. The vast majority of rich people are small business owners and managers. The wealthiest families change all the time. most black people are handed nothing but a basketball and a crack pipe. Wow. Most black people huh? You really haven’t even looked at any stats on the subject, have you... I never said it was No, but the modern black victim game you’re playing is somewhat unique to them, and it contributes more to current conditions than slavery does. It's because japanese people have higher IQs They do, but they also have a culture of high personal drive. While there is a genetic component to IQ, the effect of culture on medium term IQ improvement is only beginning to be understood. When Eastern European Jews got to the US, they had lower average IQs. They now have higher average IQs. This was true for Asian Americans as well. I would like to see the statistics for that from an unbiased source. That won’t work because any source you don’t like you claim comes from biased Zionists. However, there is a PBS documentary about how black families in the 70”s were actively broken up by state workers selling them on welfare and project housing. The correlation between two parent families and successful children is well established. You don't seem to understand, ever hear of "the hood" or "the ghetto" ? You know, those impoverished areas we herded the blacks into that they are still stuck in. 22% of Black people are in poverty. That’s a greater percentage than everyone else (except for Native Americans who’ve been ensnared in the communist reservation system since the time of slavery). The point is that 22%is not most. Environment shapes behaviour to a large extent, and we created the shitty environment that keeps many black people down. I agree. We disagree on exactly how that shitty environment came to be. Encouraging a victim mentality to demand more of the same problem is not a solution. That's not even what I'm saying. It just is that way on average because for generations we let the whites operate freely and kept the blacks down, and thus they have inherited an economic status, an environment and a way of perceiving things that has been carried over from the past and keeps them from being successful. There is a culture of poverty that is not race specific and can be difficult for an individual to disentangle themselves from. Those that are able to drop the attitudes and behaviors endemic to poverty culture most often do much better in life. Pretending that there is nothing for a person to do but demand handouts and favors (or redistribute the wealth of others’ efforts) perpetuates the poverty culture. There is a reason that all the ghettos are filled with black people and all the nice neighborhoods are filled with white people The disparity is not as stark along racial lines as you pretend. But the disproportionality that does exist is largely cultural. If you find an Indian family in a poor neighborhood, they probably have a nice home, and their family will be out of poverty in a generation or less. Similarly, black immigrants who have not been told to blame everyone but themselves do much better than their African American counterparts. Black people from South America do better than the US average. it's because 100 years ago all the black people were being deliberately restricted to the ghettos The great migration started in 1910. The thing is, you can't just expect people to magically thrive when they are in an economic situation and a mentality that has been left over from a time of abject oppression. There’s nothing magical about thriving. We can point to certain behaviors and attitudes that enable individuals and communities to do just that. The mentality is the biggest driver of economic success over the long run. But behaviors and attitudes don’t come from the outside, so it’s not politically expedient to point it out. Rather, politicians and activists make a living off casting blame and taking no responsibility. If the cause isn’t racism, then it’s not acceptable. for generations black people have been conditioned the same psychologically by the environment they're stuck in, we have created an environment which programs black people to stay in poverty, because they are raised in poverty which creates the mentality of poverty. It’s not only the programs which take away a sense of self reliance (and capture the poor of all races), it’s a pervasive narrative that white society is holding down black society, removing any sense of responsibility and hope. Because asian American's don't have to put you in slavery for a few hundred years to get ahead. A few hundred? No, thousands of years. And it’s not a white person thing, it was literally everyone. Slavery was common to all until western civilization made it unacceptable the world over. The same philosophies and institutions that called for an end to slavery also caused “white Americans” to get ahead, along with anyone else with the virtues required to succeed (such as Asians and people of literally any race). Slavery created awful conditions for newly freed black people to start from. Persistent racism in our society and institutions certainly hindered progress. But the greatest obstacle to progress today is internal to black poverty culture, and blaming Whitey for this circumstance only serves to hinder its removal. Side: It's a thing
The thing is that in America black people are still largely stuck in circumstances that are the result of their history of oppression. How are they “stuck” what’s keeping them “stuck “ So regardless of whether they are currently being systematically oppressed on a deliberate level, they are still structurally oppressed by the structure of capitalism. Nonsense , what holds American blacks back is black attitude as in the very thing you’re doing here blame everyone and everything for the situation many find themselves in . So are you saying that poor American blacks cannot elevate themselves from their circumstances ? There is a reason that white people are almost always the ones with fat stacks of paper, and it's not because they are just inherently better than everyone else. It's because of inheritance, and because they get to grow up in the nice neighborhoods Absolute bullshit , people from my country went to the U S after the famine and were treated like dogs with signs saying “No Irish ,no blacks , no dogs” , yet look how well the majority of Irish fared out as they carved out a place in every field of commerce , politics , finance . while the black people have inherited dust for generations and are still stuck in the poverty stricken dung holes we confined them to back when the mainstream view was that they are subhuman. Yes , the Irish had that as well White privilege means that on average, white people are better off than black people from the moment they are born, not necessarily because racism is still inherent in America's social order, but because the circumstances which have been brought about by the history of racism have not been rectified. So what about the many blacks who do indeed do very well? Is that not using your logic Black privilege , blacks have also been born and raised in affluent circumstances,so surely that’s black privilege as they have way more than poor whites don’t they? When a group of people are stripped of their identity and forced into slavery, then suddenly "freed" only to spend generations being systematically oppressed as a serf class that society still considers inferior, things don't suddenly become better just because you give them the right to vote and say "ok, you can be considered people now". Very same , for the Irish , Italians , poles etc, etc, who lived in the most appalling American ghettos yet made something of themselves , this appalling victomhood card played by certain blacks who wail about slavery , oppression and racism is a tired lame excuse that’s used by over the top P C buffoons like you to excuse the appalling levels of criminality, antisocial behaviour and violence by waving away and excusing it because” They were victims of slavery “ Actually your tear jerking portrayal of life for the American black is actually racist as you’re basically admitting they cannot better themselves , is that something genetic that prevents them and how come many do indeed better themselves? Are blacks not capable of elevating themselves like whites from the most disadvantaged backgrounds because many of both colour do, I guess you can reply to this by using the favourite trump card and branding me a racist for daring to tell it like it is . Side: It's a thing
@Spirit The thing is that in America black people are still largely stuck in circumstances that are the result of their history of oppression. So regardless of whether they are currently being systematically oppressed on a deliberate level, they are still structurally oppressed by the structure of capitalism. I know when I first moved out of my parents place after High School, I thought that people born in urban environments actually had merit to the argument "they are born in the trap and cannot get out". Then, I realized all you needed is a few thousand dollars saved up (or borrowed, from loans/debt that is easily available in America) for a down payments, and then get a job (any job) and you can afford rent in a nice, safe area. In which case, it is trivially easy to leave, as long as you work. Side: It's a thing
@MIngwuwu It is actually quite simple for anyone in America to become well off. There are 15+ degrees at Community College alone that will set a person up with a job in the $40,000-$70,000 range. With that income, one can buy property, live in it for a bit, pay it off, then buy another place and rent the other out and receive passive income every month. After repeat this a bit, within 10 years or so, a person could easily retire based on the rent money they receive per month, and (if necessary) work only seasonally there on it. That is if a person values time over money, now, if they value money, they can continue that process and scale up as they have more income. Everyone has that opportunity available to them in America, amongst many, many others. Side: Bs of highest order
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
@xMathFanx Hello there Mathfan, I am back once again after being banned. I see you are leaning more to the right these days, which is unfortunate but I can see your reasoning. I would like to discuss this with you because it seems to me that the "bad apples" of the left are pushing you away despite a left wing approach being more in line with the direction humanity should be taking. Most people who consider themselves left wingers are not at all in line with the truly progressive "way of the future" that Nom was talking about. When you look at the modern brands of feminism, nanny state ideology and other things associated with the left, there are many valid criticisms to be made. These things are not inherent to the left or even the far left, they are instead derived from an authoritarian brand of leftism and from the poorly articulated ideologies of those who lack maturity on the left. This corrupted version of leftism is very common, just as the corrupted version of the right is more prevalent than true libertarian right wingers like Styxhexenhammer (youtube) for example. The fact of the matter is there are real feminists, real anti-fascists etc. and then there are the ones you hear about from the media or the ones the media misrepresents. Don't let Nom's hostility towards you (I have bypassed his hostility recently and come to a good understanding with him) or the less rational brand of leftism deter you from considering the libertarian, rational brand of leftism. If you want to examine the true face of the left, I will be here. Side: Bs of highest order
1
point
Is this Nom. ? No, this is FactMachine. Me and Nom are friends now and we have come to terms with the fact that we agree about a lot of things and stopped being such massive dick heads to each other. Unfortunately Nom still hates you but I have much more confidence in you than he does. I think you are being pushed away from the left because of propaganda and because of a corrupted brand of leftism which is becoming more prevalent in society. I still ultimately promote an RBE system but I have realized over the past few months that I sympathize heavily with Marxism and Socialism and it would not be at all inaccurate to describe me as a Socialist. There are a lot of misconceptions (particularly in America) of what socialism in it's true form entails, and the centralized state-socialism model is actually antithetical to true socialism at it's ideological roots. Side: Bs of highest order
@Fact I am glad to hear that Nom & you have hashed out differences, and for the record I do not "hate" Nom--although I strongly disagree with him and will hold the line as strongly as necessary to ensure it is enforced. Now, I would submit the reason I was a bit more left-leaning for a time is fundamentally due to propaganda, even though I have always been more on the "traditionalist" end of the spectrum in many ways, as much of the arguments from "the left" are intended to provoke people's center for compassion to the vulnerable--although, it may or may not actually be the case. Of course, some ideas from the left I still find merit with, although through a different lens than previously which leads to different real world structures/models. I will be expanding on this much more in the future, and what it practically means for various areas of society. For now, generally speaking, essentially what a lot of the actual "discussion conflict" is about concerns "freedom of speech & personal ownership" vs "controlled speech & outsourced ownership for 'security measures'"---or, Right v Left. I am interested to read your response and discuss these topics more in the future. Side: Bs of highest order
1
point
@mathfan Now, I would submit the reason I was a bit more left-leaning for a time is fundamentally due to propaganda There is no escaping propaganda, whether it is left or right wing when it comes to politics. The type of leftism I am advocating is totally transcendent of political institutions as they are currently known. For now, generally speaking, essentially what a lot of the actual "discussion conflict" is about concerns "freedom of speech & personal ownership" vs "controlled speech & outsourced ownership for 'security measures'"---or, Right v Left. This perception of what left and right means is simply not accurate. There are a broad range of possible implications on both sides depending not only on how "left" or "right" you are but also how "up" (libertarian) or "down" (authoritarian) you are on the political compass. Me and Nom are both far left and far up. What left and right mean fundamentally are collectivism (left) and individualism (right). Individualism may sound better on a surface level, but in practice right wing societies are socially stratified due to the fact that they allow class disparity to run wild and thus even a libertarian free market will always ultimately result in croney capitalism and authoritarianism at the end of the day due to the snowballing of wealth and power in the hands of the few. Collectivism can also manifest in ugly ways, but unlike individualism it does not inherently result in exploitation, stratification and tyranny. For example, if you maintain individual freedoms, but collectivize the ownership of the means of production (socialism as it's meant to be). Outsourced ownership is not a left wing thing at all, it is in fact the defining characteristic of the right. When resources and production are centrally controlled by the state, that is pretty much the precise opposite of collectivism, and when it's controlled by private owners what ends up happening is that the masses are forced to work for a handful of wealthy people with the primary goal of the societies' production being to profit the wealthy class rather than to produce the maximum amount of abundance and prosperity for society as a whole. Side: Bs of highest order
@Fact This perception of what left and right means is simply not accurate. There are a broad range of possible implications on both sides depending not only on how "left" or "right" you are but also how "up" (libertarian) or "down" (authoritarian) you are on the political compass. The left is becoming increasingly (extremely) authoritarian, rather than, for instance, small scale commune societies that would in fact be free--and i have zero issue with the voluntary assembly and participation of. The right is becoming increasingly libertarian, within the boundaries of a given homeland. Me and Nom are both far left and far up. I can't speak to your views, though Nom is most definitely not "libertarian" by any stretch of the imagination. He very much fits in with the general SJW trend. Individualism may sound better on a surface level, but in practice right wing societies are socially stratified due to the fact that they allow class disparity to run wild They are socially stratified because people want to be left alone and tend to join small communities of like minded people with some degree of overlapping interests--not all that different than the concept behind small voluntary communes. Also, this is why it is common to see right-wing sporting "don't tread on me" flags. As for class disparity and "wealth inequality" generally, there is not a set "x" number of dollars in the country that is assigned a particular value relative to the rest of the world. It is not as though it was decided that America gets "x", China "y", Germany "z", countries in Africa "a", etc. etc. etc. Rather, it is dependent upon how much value is 'brought to the table' from a particular nation, which is why economies can grow and shrink. Much of the economic reasoning on the left is based upon the idea that America has been assigned "x", like a fixed budget, and then it is all a matter of how things are to be distributed inside the nation. If you were able to purchase land and produce large farming on a crop that is not in surplus (i.e. in demand), you will have just increased to the overall strength of the economy, which is a very different notion than those operating on the "fixed budget" idea. Also, unlike a long time ago, the economy is not held simply to these kinds of crops (and such) items for increased strength, but rather anything that provides value to the world. If you come up with an extraordinary invention, that also helps the market. Then, people require resources and accumulated wealth in order to help create new value, through investment. In many ways, those with huge businesses and wealth are typically the "all-stars" of the American economy (and others), not savages. However, it is important to note that the way in which they acquire the money is also very important, and the left has some good criticisms in this regard. Outsourced ownership is not a left wing thing at all, it is in fact the defining characteristic of the right. Outsourced ownership applies on a large range of topics, and i will briefly discuss two here. First, the right wants people to take personal ownership for their (and their family) health & safety. They want less laws that obtrude into peoples personal lives, and settle more of their own disputes (outside of very serious infractions). This comes with an understanding that the police, paramedics, etc. cannot (and should not) be everywhere all at once to help people with all real or perceived threats, and that keeping the courts out of most life matters is best (unless something very serious happens). With this comes the responsibility of training, preparing, physically and with emergency medical knowledge, and not 'blowing the whistle' in most cases for an outside referee that overwhelmingly acts tyrannically to settle disputes--and can not possibly accurately catch every call. The left continues to add ever more obtrusive rules into the game, give the referees more and more power while the individual players become increasingly dis-empowered. This is making our society increasingly weaker, softer, and is often why you hear the charge of "more feminine" or "soy-boy", etc. etc. This is also becoming a serious problem with romantic relationships, divorce, self-defense, etc. etc. etc. Second, lets continue with the example of say, an apple orchard as the number "x" int he American economy. Now, naturally, different people in such a society are going to produce various degrees of apples for a variety of reasons. Highly successful farmers perhaps have a better plot of land, maybe they have a better strategy, work harder/longer, or some combination of these factors. Now they may be willing to voluntarily give some of their apples to others or barter for other items. Everyone has personal responsibility for their keep, and also may rely upon the good will of others during possibly difficult times. Due to this, there is an incentive for people to maintain a certain level of civility and respect for one another, as people are less likely to "give up" and/or trade with enemies. Then, envy and ill-motive is restrained through the need to co-operate. Now, the left argues to mandate that a "third-body" (made up of the majority opinion) will determine how all the apples in the community are distributed, irrespective of who produced what, and this will be enforced through "third-body" regulation agencies that cannot be legally contended with (i.e. you cannot use force against the police, though they can use force against you. Also, the courts make the laws, you obey. etc. etc.). It has been known and argued since the construction of America that if this were allowed to happen, then the public, who produce less than the "all-stars" will use the "third-body" agencies to take their apples, against their will, often in order to take less personal ownership of peoples individual circumstances, and this will destroy the community with a general spirit of ill will and tyrannical authority of the majority (i.e. "the tyranny of the majority). This is why they constructed a Constitutional Republic, rather than a Democracy, with a set of rights that could not be simply taken away from each individual person--and the primary purpose of the government was to ensure this is carried out (i.e. these rights are upheld) by democratically elected leaders, inside the context of the system set up. Also, it is worth mentioning--i am not religious, however the reason much of the right is religious is due to the necessity of understanding the themes, lessons, etc. etc. in the "Lord of the Rings" novel, for instance, as essential to understanding human actions and motivations. Without which, one is lost. Now, from the left, we see the denial and ignorance of this, which has been coming at quite an increasingly high cost. --------------------------------------- I will stop here for now, as the post has gone on quite long already. Side: Bs of highest order
The left is becoming increasingly (extremely) authoritarian This is just simply factually inaccurate. Authoritarianism is a concept associated with right wing politics, while totalitarianism is the left wing equivalent. If the point you are attempting to make is that American Liberals are becoming authoritarian then I can certainly agree up to a point, but then American Liberals are not on the left. Even so, the Republicans have been, are, and likely always will be the party which exerts the greater degree of authoritarianism. Indeed, you yourself are a great example of this, because you have a history of maliciously complaining about people who do not agree with you in order to try to have their accounts banned. Side: Bs of highest order
Recall your own public stance on "free speech". You would very much like to omit the details of my public stance on free speech, because they were that lying should be banned. Go right ahead and defend to me your right to maliciously lie about people and facts. I'm eager to read it. Side: Bs of highest order
Do you see any potential issues with outlawing lying? Do you see any potential issues with not outlawing lying? For instance, how to classify a lie If what you say is factually inaccurate, then it's a lie. grey areas such as "white lies" White lies are not a grey area. They are lies which are not intended maliciously. I can see an argument for allowing them, but I would retort that white lies are themselves damaging. For example, if I ask you if I look fat in this and your answer is no, then if I later go out dancing and people make fun of me for being fat, then the sad feelings I experience will be -- at least partly -- because of the lie you told me. Side: Bs of highest order
0
points
Investment, what have you got to begin with, 0 because you pay it all in rent. Good luck in life, some have it harder than others. Just one of the many ways capitalism keeps most people down in every way possible while providing untold numbers of advantages to the wealthy due to the simple fact that money is literally all that matters at the end of the day in our filthy primitive society of schizophrenic apes. Side: Bs of highest order
While incredibly difficult, he can succeed not as the 'worker' type but the guy who starts the business himself type. He first needs to find a place where many poor-types collect to live even cutting rooms in half to fit 8 people in a 4-5 bedroom place you get me? Then even his 'shitty job' can be enough to put some aside. I highly recommend learning poker and hitting the casinos locally or online to turn your little into something more but that shit takes a lot of spare time to learn because it's far more than logic it's 'how to pull it off' and on a really cheap internet connection that regularly cuts out due to bandwidth strangling yeah... it's tough I know. Eventually he'd have enough to do something, move out and gained a rep in whatever line of work he does, is one of his poor roommates a bodyguard? Perhaps get into that if you got the body and mindset for it, fuck you an be a legit security guard for a 5-star hotel. Then you put aside enough, stay in the shitty housing and slowly begin your 'snowball'. Side: It's a thing
Should I show you a list of successful blacks who were born in poverty? It's rather long. If they can do it, anyone can. Success is the result of personal effort. Anyone can get an education. Anyone can get a decent paying job if they work at it. The past is past. It has no effect on ones ability to succeed. Side: It's a thing
It's hard to take any sentence with the phrase "reverse racism" seriously. It's just racism. There is no reverse to it, a single minority doesn't hold the patent on it, it's just racism. I genuinely dislike the term "white privilege" as it's tossed around so much now. I got to where I am by working my ass off and earning what I get. At one point in time white privilege was a thing, and in some areas it may still be an issue, especially with education..... but as a blanket statement to generalize any white person who has worked to get where they are through blood, sweat and tears, it's ridiculous and often used as a way to excuse lack of motivation for others. Side: Bs of highest order
|
|