Why the white privilege argument is pure bull**** [W:107]

It also explains a lot about liberalism in general, and the associated guilt complex.

American said:

It also explains a lot about liberalism in general, and the associated guilt complex.

Click to expand...

IMO his argument is applicable to many of the SJW demands for action. For example, the Black Lives Matter movement...which demands that society do something about (white) cops shooting "innocent" Black citizens while taking neither responsibility nor social action on the larger problem of Black criminals killing other Black citizens. Or the "violence of hate groups" argued by Antifas and BAMN as justification for perpetrating said violence themselves.

Set the example. Like that BLM leader said...Progressive White folks give your stuff up to us poor non-White folks.

Dinesh D'Souza's behavior throughout the years is a prime example of white privilege itself. It is part of a trend of minorities to include people like Ben Carson, Herman Cain, Michelle Malkin, and others to throw their fellow minorities under the bus in order to ingratiate themselves and become more acceptable to conservative whites by denying that minorities are treated differently than white people by society: something that is an obvious fact of life to 99 percent of minorities. And that's before we get into the fact that D'Souza is not only a criminal and but a well known conspiracy theorist.

White privilege exists. There is a ton of academic research and evidence for it, **** you could look up if you simply know how to Google. And there is no more obvious example of white privilege than the flaming idiot manchild currently occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, compared to his predecessor.

The defense rests its case.

Whatever makes you sleep better at night, I guess....statistics are against you, and even most white people know they have an easier go of it than others, but one can always find something on YouTube to make themselves feel better...

StillBallin75 said:

Dinesh D'Souza's behavior throughout the years is a prime example of white privilege itself. It is part of a trend of minorities to include people like Ben Carson, Herman Cain, Michelle Malkin, and others to throw their fellow minorities under the bus in order to ingratiate themselves and become more acceptable to conservative whites by denying that minorities are treated differently than white people by society: something that is an obvious fact of life to 99 percent of minorities. And that's before we get into the fact that D'Souza is not only a criminal and but a well known conspiracy theorist.

White privilege exists. There is a ton of academic research and evidence for it, **** you could look up if you simply know how to Google. And there is no more obvious example of white privilege than the flaming idiot manchild currently occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, compared to his predecessor.

The defense rests its case.

Click to expand...

A criminal? Hyperbole much? I see this thread will cause leftist heads to explode.

StillBallin75 said:

Dinesh D'Souza's behavior throughout the years is a prime example of white privilege itself. It is part of a trend of minorities to include people like Ben Carson, Herman Cain, Michelle Malkin, and others to throw their fellow minorities under the bus in order to ingratiate themselves and become more acceptable to conservative whites by denying that minorities are treated differently than white people by society: something that is an obvious fact of life to 99 percent of minorities. And that's before we get into the fact that D'Souza is not only a criminal and but a well known conspiracy theorist.

White privilege exists. There is a ton of academic research and evidence for it, **** you could look up if you simply know how to Google. And there is no more obvious example of white privilege than the flaming idiot manchild currently occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, compared to his predecessor.

The defense rests its case.

Click to expand...

Yep...White Privilege as proven by Eddie Murphy decades ago:

StillBallin75 said:

Dinesh D'Souza's behavior throughout the years is a prime example of white privilege itself. It is part of a trend of minorities to include people like Ben Carson, Herman Cain, Michelle Malkin, and others to throw their fellow minorities under the bus in order to ingratiate themselves and become more acceptable to conservative whites by denying that minorities are treated differently than white people by society: something that is an obvious fact of life to 99 percent of minorities. And that's before we get into the fact that D'Souza is not only a criminal and but a well known conspiracy theorist.

White privilege exists. There is a ton of academic research and evidence for it, **** you could look up if you simply know how to Google. And there is no more obvious example of white privilege than the flaming idiot manchild currently occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, compared to his predecessor.

The defense rests its case.

Click to expand...

The point was not whether white privilege exists, and I accept that it surely does, the point is what exactly should be done about it. The idea that simply describing a problem and then "resting your case" is akin to offering a solution is what was being challenged. While the "safety net" may keep one from starving or becoming homeless it does not put the poor into college or give them any job (or social) skills to better their position.

Does demolish anything as far as I can tell. He starts out stating a false dichotomy (we have to either have equal rights under the law, or correct for history--but not both). Then he says that we'd have to take away people's furniture--which is downright absurd.

Then he assumes that the guy who asked the question isn't himself willing to pay. I didn't hear the guy say he wasn't willing to pay--he probably advocates for higher taxes, which he may also be perfectly willing to pay. I'm willing to pay higher taxes to have a more robust safety net--one from which I will likely never benefit. As it is, in lieu of that, I donate a substantial portion of my income to help the poor, and most others who believe in social justice do the same with either money or (if they lack money) labor that they could use to make more money.

That you find this argument remotely convincing ought to embarrass you. D'Souza ought to have been embarrassed to make this argument.

StillBallin75 said:

Dinesh D'Souza's behavior throughout the years is a prime example of white privilege itself. It is part of a trend of minorities to include people like Ben Carson, Herman Cain, Michelle Malkin, and others to throw their fellow minorities under the bus in order to ingratiate themselves and become more acceptable to conservative whites by denying that minorities are treated differently than white people by society: something that is an obvious fact of life to 99 percent of minorities. And that's before we get into the fact that D'Souza is not only a criminal and but a well known conspiracy theorist.

Click to expand...

The emboldened part above is one of the biggest reasons minorities feel they can't succeed. Other minorities won't let them. If they try to succeed (that's acting white, right?) they'll be ostracized by other minorities and labeled as Uncle Joes.

What a sad state of affairs, and what an incredible hurdle to put in front of minorities who want better lives.

White privilege exists. There is a ton of academic research and evidence for it, **** you could look up if you simply know how to Google. And there is no more obvious example of white privilege than the flaming idiot manchild currently occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, compared to his predecessor.

The defense rests its case.

Click to expand...

Privilege exists -- not "white" privilege. The inability to recognize that very important difference is holding minorities down and creating a victim mentality that only harms them further.

****ing fascinating.

Incredibly sad -- but fascinating.

The concept or white privilege is a racist farce with the intent of brewing identity politics. It needs to be denounced as racism publicly instead of entertained as a valid concept.

Captain Adverse said:

IMO his argument is applicable to many of the SJW demands for action. For example, the Black Lives Matter movement...which demands that society do something about (white) cops shooting "innocent" Black citizens while taking neither responsibility nor social action on the larger problem of Black criminals killing other Black citizens. Or the "violence of hate groups" argued by Antifas and BAMN as justification for perpetrating said violence themselves.

Set the example. Like that BLM leader said...Progressive White folks give your stuff up to us poor non-White folks.

Click to expand...

What BLM should focus on is the crappy culture that exists in poor black communities. Snitches shouldn’t mean stitches. Our hand-ups shouldn’t incentivize the destruction of the black family. Instead of focusing on the relatively few cop incidents, BLM should focus on teaching the black community the value of education and be DEMANDING that our failing inner-city schools perform instead of babysit. Focus on moms teaching them that the way out is making sure their kids GET an education. They should be pounding the pavement for youth centers in their neighborhoods, in front of precincts to demand better police protection in the war zones they call home. What a waste of a movement.

The NFL players’ worthless demonstrations that put the blame elsewhere should actually DO something. Clamoring for, and working towards, all of the above.

Claiming white privilege is simply avoiding personal responsibility. Blacks themselves are responsible for their failure to thrive. Well, blacks and the failing Democratic leadership in our major cities who are quite happy keeping them on their plantations where they belong.

digsbe said:

The concept or white privilege is a racist farce with the intent of brewing identity politics. It needs to be denounced as racism publicly instead of entertained as a valid concept.

Click to expand...

What an odd thing to assert. No, it's not that, and saying that it is won't magically make it so.

It's a valid concept no matter how much that angers some people.

It is said that a young man without a liberal mind has no heart.

And an old man without a conservative heart has no mind.

But neither explain how some become off-the-hook libbos or rightwingtards. As few as they both are in actual numbers, it seems it is they who establish the public identity/image of either viewpoint.

For the rest of us, hovering around the middle, adhering to the better ideas and common sense regardless on which side of the fence the idea falls on, (ie: left/right) we just look at those guys, shake our head, and giggle.

Regarding the topic of white privilege. The question has been posed many times over, "Would you have any problem trading color with a black person?" If one says, "yes," then that should be enough evidence to establish white privilege. For, if it was non-existent, then what matter would it make if one is white or not?

I think the speaker was dead-nuts on. We cannot feasibly erase and repair any and all historical actions. Otherwise, the native American owns us all. Historically, gains were accomplished by conquest. It's not just a "white" thing either.

Viewpoints are in constant change. Whereas, today's viewpoint of doing our best to achieve across the board "equalization," is a modern and righteous concept, our society and government has made tangible efforts and acts to that end. That's the best we can do unless we all want to go back before the days of Plymouth Rock. I mean, where do we draw the time-line if fair is to be fair?

It is what it is. People need to adapt and improvise.

However, to deny "white privilege," as a reality, is hard for me to do if for no other reason than the numbers and facts are evident regardless how I feel about it.

I have "white privilege." Let me be the first to admit it.

I had the privilege of having, both, a mother and father, married, providing support and role-modeling in a strong family unit.
I had the privilege of being disciplined and led in a direction that provided security, health and prosperity.
I had the privilege of studying my ass off and paying through the nose for student loans, giving years of my life to self-enhancement.
I had the privilege of respecting my teachers and behaving in my classrooms.
I had the privilege of inherently obeying the laws given in our society thus avoiding courts, jails and prisons.
I had the privilege of 60's television when the Hollywood images of society had a more positive and peaceful message.
I had classic rock that sang about love, good times and personal freedom, (as opposed to the "kind" of music that glorifies just about every negative human trait I can imagine.)
I had the privilege of a leather belt, in more ways than one. The least not being that it helped me keep my pants above my hips rather than half-way down my ass.
I had the privilege of serving my country by serving in the mightiest NAVY ever known to mankind.
I had the privilege of marrying a nice girl who has been a good wife and fabulous mother.
I have had the privilege to support and lead my 3 "white" sons in the most positive direction as I could. (They did GREAT, by the way. Proud Papa here.)
I have the privilege to get my ass out of bed and work 2 solid jobs and sometimes 3. It has been like that for YEARS.
So, as a result, I have the privilege of driving a nice car and living in a nice home with a nice yard, a tall flagpole and I have a cool boat that I fish out of a LOT! I have way too many cool toys. (What I call collecting my wife calls hoarding.)

This must ALL be because of white privilege because I don't see but a few black folks aspiring to what I call "privilege," and emulating the formula/path I took to achieve this "privilege." Therefore it must just be a "white" thing.

Indeed. I must have "white privilege." How come I don't feel guilty about it?

Probably because anybody that wants it can have it. It's a choice now. Not a skin color.

Just my 2 cents.

StillBallin75 said:

Dinesh D'Souza's behavior throughout the years is a prime example of white privilege itself. It is part of a trend of minorities to include people like Ben Carson, Herman Cain, Michelle Malkin, and others to throw their fellow minorities under the bus in order to ingratiate themselves and become more acceptable to conservative whites by denying that minorities are treated differently than white people by society: something that is an obvious fact of life to 99 percent of minorities. And that's before we get into the fact that D'Souza is not only a criminal and but a well known conspiracy theorist.

White privilege exists. There is a ton of academic research and evidence for it, **** you could look up if you simply know how to Google. And there is no more obvious example of white privilege than the flaming idiot manchild currently occupying 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, compared to his predecessor.

The defense rests its case.

Click to expand...

Throwing their fellow minorities under the bus....

You really think these people aren't genuine in their thoughts and beliefs? You claim they do it just to be accepted by conservative white people?

that is quite interesting, do they have a say in this? Or is this enough to completely disregard their point of view?... I know quite a few minorities who have very similar thoughts and opinions as they do, but are not near as public... they actually often have to hide their opinions most of the time, because their opinions are very taboo in their own community.
Quite the cop out, and rather rude if you ask me lol

I believe Dinesh describes very well why/how he was put in jail, I thought you used to be a bit more reasonable of a person.... but it seems you have taken a partisan dive.

White privileged does not exist in my opinion, or at least it does not exist without equivalent privileges unique to every kind of demographic you can break Americans into...and I find it quite pointless to try to compare now days who has it worse and in what circumstance.

American said:

It also explains a lot about liberalism in general, and the associated guilt complex.

Click to expand...

What exactly is the "white privilege argument"?

until the black community somehow recognizes that raising a child in a one parent household automatically puts said child in a much tougher environment, there isnt going to be much improvement

almost 3/4 of black kids are raised in single family homes.....why?

and compare that to white, Hispanic, or Asian cultures

it is much easier to raise a kid in a two earner family....

everyone knows about the problem, but i see nothing changing...and the stats keep getting worse

is it privilege to have two parents? parents that actually care if you attend school? parents that make sure you have enough to eat in the mornings before climbing aboard the bus? parents that actually help you do your homework, and push you to to do better in school?

when a single mom has to work 2 jobs just to keep a roof over her head, and food on the table is it any wonder her kids lack for the support they need?

that is a problem...but not caused by "white privilege"

Not enough good father figures, and role models in the black community....and that is the MAIN issue i see

Tanngrisnir said:

What an odd thing to assert. No, it's not that, and saying that it is won't magically make it so.

It's a valid concept no matter how much that angers some people.

Click to expand...

No, It's racist. There is no white privilege and the concept of such only serves as validation to discriminate against whites and push a minority victim mentality. It's all about Democrats using racism to whip up voter bases tied to identity politics.

gdgyva said:

until the black community somehow recognizes that raising a child in a one parent household automatically puts said child in a much tougher environment, there isnt going to be much improvement

Click to expand...

In the early 20th century, only about 1/4 of black kids were born out of wedlock.

IMO this has a lot to do with the effect of the "sexual revolution" and increasingly permissive attitudes toward child-rearing than anything. I'm old enough to remember when there was an active political movement with plenty of TV coverage pushing for legitimizing out of wedlock births and normalizing single parenthood. At the time there was a lot of pushback against it, pointing out the need of the child to psychologically have both parents and the impact on family poverty that single parenting has and so forth. The feminist movement in the 60s and 70s was heavily pushing for the removal of taboos against single motherhood. People who advocated keeping single parenthood taboo were dismissed as misogynist bigots.

The movement seems to have affected blacks most, but out of wedlock births have markedly increased in all demographics since the early 20th century.

The political left has yet to come to terms with the amount of damage that their movement is causing.

digsbe said:

No, It's racist. There is no white privilege and the concept of such only serves as validation to discriminate against whites and push a minority victim mentality. It's all about Democrats using racism to whip up voter bases tied to identity politics.

Click to expand...

It's actually more than just that.

It's about the political left wanting to take over white-majority countries. As such, majority-bashing is a valued tool. Destroy the social fabric of a country by attacking the majority population until they either capitulate and hand over power or mix into a migrant population and eventually simply disappear as a people.

digsbe said:

No, It's racist. There is no white privilege and the concept of such only serves as validation to discriminate against whites and push a minority victim mentality. It's all about Democrats using racism to whip up voter bases tied to identity politics.

Click to expand...

No, it's not. Again, saying it's 'racist' won't magically make it racist. White priviledge exists, and it's not about Democrats. It's simply objective reality.

You seem not to understand what it actually is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...e-privilege-explained/?utm_term=.fe845dc9b656
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/gina...vilege-to-a-broke-white-person_b_5269255.html

worksforpigs said:

It's actually more than just that.

It's about the political left wanting to take over white-majority countries. As such, majority-bashing is a valued tool. Destroy the social fabric of a country by attacking the majority population until they either capitulate and hand over power or mix into a migrant population and eventually simply disappear as a people.

Click to expand...

So, IOW, you have absolutely no idea what white priviledge actually is.

A primer for the short of understanding. You may not believe it, but you benefit anyway.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/gina...vilege-to-a-broke-white-person_b_5269255.html

Tanngrisnir said:

No, it's not. Again, saying it's 'racist' won't magically make it racist. White priviledge exists, and it's not about Democrats. It's simply objective reality.

You seem not to understand what it actually is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_privilege
https://www.washingtonpost.com/blog...e-privilege-explained/?utm_term=.fe845dc9b656
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/gina...vilege-to-a-broke-white-person_b_5269255.html

Click to expand...

White privilege only exists in the minds of the intellectually dishonest, those with a political agenda, and those who want want something for nothing.

Not surprised to see you among those those dubious groups. From your wiki link:

The notion of white privilege has been critiqued on the basis that privileges that white people enjoy are actually rights that should be given to all people. Lewis Gordon rejects the idea of white privilege, arguing that the privileges from which whites as a group are supposed to benefit are, in fact, social goods to which all people aspire. As such, he writes, they are not privileges:

A privilege is something that not everyone needs, but a right is the opposite. Given this distinction, an insidious dimension of the white-privilege argument emerges. It requires condemning whites for possessing, in the concrete, features of contemporary life that should be available to all, and if this is correct, how can whites be expected to give up such things? Yes, there is the case of the reality of whites being the majority population in all the sites of actual privilege from prestigious universities to golf clubs and boards of directors for most high-powered corporations. But even among whites as a group, how many whites have those opportunities?[53]

Click to expand...

Captain Adverse said:

IMO his argument is applicable to many of the SJW demands for action. For example, the Black Lives Matter movement...which demands that society do something about (white) cops shooting "innocent" Black citizens while taking neither responsibility nor social action on the larger problem of Black criminals killing other Black citizens. Or the "violence of hate groups" argued by Antifas and BAMN as justification for perpetrating said violence themselves.

Set the example. Like that BLM leader said...Progressive White folks give your stuff up to us poor non-White folks.

Click to expand...

Holy ****. The black-on-black crime argument is the biggest red herring argument against Black Lives Matter and I'm completely tired of explaining why it's a ****ty argument.

1) Black communities routinely discuss black on black violence. The fact that this doesn't get reported because these discussions don't generate pageviews or clicks doesn't mean black people aren't interested in decreasing violent crime in their own communities

2) Black-on-black crime happens for similar reasons, and at similar rates, as white-on-white crime. Because guess what, crimes happen to people who happen to live in close proximity to one another. This is exactly why using the term black-on-black crime is particularly meaningless especially when comparing why it happens to why unarmed black citizens are gunned down by police.

3) It shouldn't be outrageous to hold the justice system, to include to law enforcement and the judicial system, to adhere to a higher standard than criminals, which is another reason for why black on black crime vs. cops killing unarmed blacks is a particularly egregious example of false equivalence.

4) People who use black on black crime as an excuse rarely even attempt to understand it as a phenomenon and instead use it as a bludgeon to discredit Black Lives Matter. The root causes of "black on black crime" are a lot more historical and systemic than simple blaming black criminality.

storybreak stars<\/title><path d="M5.146 9.01l-.19-3.623 3.057 1.985.693-1.197-3.213-1.67 3.213-1.638-.693-1.197-3.056 1.953L5.147 0H3.76l.158 3.623L.893 1.67.2 2.867l3.214 1.638L.2 6.175l.693 1.197 3.025-1.985L3.76 9.01m21.386 0l-.19-3.623 3.057 1.9

I don't usually get this amped up about any particularly topic but the "black on black crime" rebuke to Black Lives Matter particularly irks me because it comes from a place of blatant and willful ignorance.

HowardBThiname said:

White privilege only exists in the minds of the intellectually dishonest, those with a political agenda, and those who want want something for nothing.

Not surprised to see you among those those dubious groups. From your wiki link:

Click to expand...

Your objection is only about the semantics of the phrase?