Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:00 PM Apr 2012

Yes, white men are being oppressed.

Last edited Fri Apr 6, 2012, 04:46 AM - Edit history (2)

So are black men, gays, white women, straight people, black women, religious folks, Hispanic men and women, atheists... in fact, all of America's working class, 99% of our population, is being oppressed.

How? We're all being turned against each other. We fight amongst ourselves while the Plutocrats laugh at us and tell us "get a job!!!" even though the jobs don't even exist. They breathe a sigh of relief when a Greek man shoots himself instead of a Plutocrat. They even go so far as to rip off police pensions while they send them out to fight protesters who represent the 99%. The Plutocracy has got Hispanics killing blacks in Los Angeles, black voters turning on Hispanics in Georgia, Christians obsessing over atheists and gays, they've got women threatening to withhold sex from men over what a handful of rich fucks did to women, men calling women sluts for using birth control, low paid overworked Americans hating on union workers, straight people freaking out over gay marriages that don't affect their lives at all...

Think of all the battles that are being fought between all these different groups. If they all win their crusades, they STILL LOSE, because the Plutocrats have succeeded in keeping them divided against each other. The worn out victors will find themselves without health care, livable wage jobs, social safety nets or even, finally once all the jobs have been automated or shipped out of America, access to the bare necessities for survival. You'll win your little factional conflict only to find yourself starving and when you finally decide to fight back they'll send in the drones and finish you off for good.

Or you could ditch all this bullshit and realize it's the Plutocrats who started this shit and unite against them.

That means stop caring about gays and lesbians because their lifestyle will never infect you. Stop hating on Mormons. Atheism is not contagious. And like the aforementioned groups, Christianity is not the problem - duped fools who serve the Plutocracy's policy of division, however, are. Different racial groups need to recognize their common ground in their pursuit of economic justice for all. Christians need to remember what Jesus said about greed and poverty. Men and women need to stop knocking heads over who is the most oppressed and realize that the logic behind unequal pay for equal work is a two-edged sword that can be used to impoverish either gender. Women get the lower-paying jobs one day because of sexism, but the next day men are swept out of employment in droves because of mass redundancy. Then the next day Government cuts throw women out of work, too. See how that goes? Both sides lost out because you didn't see the big picture... the Plutocrats have you at war with each other and in the end they screwed you both. Non-union workers strive to destroy unions and union workers harass people who cross picket lines to their favorite store... in the end the unions get destroyed and the non-union workers get to work overtime for free, or they get unpaid internships instead of paid work. American citizens battle illegal aliens and fight to get them out of farm work, so the illegals leave - but the farm corporations refuse to make farm work safer, so what few Americans who do take those jobs, face a greater risk of dying; when what should have happened is American workers joined with the migrant farm workers and haul the farmers out and whip their asses in court and in Congress over their shit wages and deadly working conditions.

So we get back to the age-oldest question: how in the world do we get all these different groups to realize that working together is better than waging war against each other?

I had to post this because I JUST learned... this is the ultimate lesson of the Hunger Games. Why fight each other for the Plutocracy's benefit when we could be fighting them?


Edited to add: No, the oppression is not equally shared between the races and genders, etc. White Christian men are not as discriminated upon as other groups. But that's the whole point - when you are dividing and conquering a populace favoring one group over another is inherent in your strategy. Plutocrats in the West are mainly White Christian Men so that's who they favor. But when they decide to cash out, 99% of White Christian Men will get flushed down the toilet along with everyone else. We're all in the same boat.

President Obama hinted as much in his speech on race: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/18/obama-race-speech-read-th_n_92077.html

A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families - a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods - parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement - all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.


In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience - as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.
236 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Yes, white men are being oppressed. (Original Post) Zalatix Apr 2012 OP
We are NOT being oppressed equaly, lets give this one up, In EVERY society where theres a ruling... uponit7771 Apr 2012 #1
Okay then Aerows Apr 2012 #2
yes ..it would be ............progresss....... :-) uponit7771 Apr 2012 #3
I know there are disparities Aerows Apr 2012 #10
+1. And that's exactly what the modern "rights" discourse encourages us to do. Not to mention HiPointDem Apr 2012 #45
The first move in standing together is not EFerrari Apr 2012 #4
Nor is it Aerows Apr 2012 #7
Actually, I disagree. EFerrari Apr 2012 #12
So if there is sexism Aerows Apr 2012 #14
The first sentence of your post is straight out of your imagination EFerrari Apr 2012 #21
It's not inaccurate at all Aerows Apr 2012 #23
Entirely inaccurate. EFerrari Apr 2012 #28
Alrighty then Aerows Apr 2012 #33
Please do not exit... your points are logical. Zalatix Apr 2012 #36
Nope, there is nothing "logical" in arguing that people shouldn't push back EFerrari Apr 2012 #88
Racism is like a termite infestation. Nobody is arguing that the termites are not a problem. Zalatix Apr 2012 #154
I said I wasn't going to even look in this thread, but I did Aerows Apr 2012 #175
No, ProSense did not accuse you of racism, or being a racist. redqueen Apr 2012 #178
Don't go! You are 100% correct! nt stevenleser Apr 2012 #37
Don't go - you are in the right. nt hack89 Apr 2012 #42
I agree with your points REP Apr 2012 #51
+1000. nt. polly7 Apr 2012 #201
Discrimination Pie tastes no better in anyone's mouth Aerows Apr 2012 #225
Dont go any where m8 Dokkie Apr 2012 #170
That is ProSense Apr 2012 #38
#175 goes for you, too ProSense n/t Aerows Apr 2012 #176
+1 to prosense, ignoring the "Southern Strategy" emboldens these bastards to enact anti voter uponit7771 Apr 2012 #183
Hell yes Aerows Apr 2012 #224
After the fact, thank you for acknowledging this Aerows Apr 2012 #222
"The first step toward standing together is not telling other people to shut up" Aerows Apr 2012 #221
We did. redqueen Apr 2012 #5
I'm a woman Aerows Apr 2012 #6
You're both right OriginalGeek Apr 2012 #29
so long as the focus is primarily on the views of individuals, so long as the discourse of HiPointDem Apr 2012 #47
I was instructed to your post for some reason Number23 Apr 2012 #189
Please learn history: MLK Jr. was assassinated during his Poor People's Campaign Zalatix Apr 2012 #206
After my exchange with you downthread Number23 Apr 2012 #210
After my exchange with you downthread Zalatix Apr 2012 #212
You have nothing to say. You have no data. No facts. No information Number23 Apr 2012 #213
Whoops, I bothered responding to you. Now whatcha gonna do? Zalatix Apr 2012 #214
Nothing I have said in ANY way refutes what you've typed Number23 Apr 2012 #215
"Nothing I have said in ANY way refutes what you've typed" <-- LOL!!! Zalatix Apr 2012 #217
Oh my Aerows Apr 2012 #223
Three weeks after the post was posted, and you still couldn't bother to read it? Number23 Apr 2012 #226
Well this came out of left field Aerows Apr 2012 #227
I don't care about your values Number23 Apr 2012 #228
Values Aerows Apr 2012 #229
Oh, and by the way? Aerows Apr 2012 #230
You need to take another three weeks off Number23 May 2012 #231
Glad you decided to get out into the fresh air Aerows May 2012 #232
Oh, and Gambit? Aerows May 2012 #233
And you may wish to evaluate leaping into a thread THREE WEEKS after it was started Number23 May 2012 #234
Yep, I'd agree Aerows May 2012 #235
Finally, something from you that makes sense. Number23 May 2012 #236
That's a great point. Brooklyn Dame Apr 2012 #25
Battle and cripple the 1% and the other issues will resolve themselves. Zalatix Apr 2012 #58
Thank you. +100,000! Zalatix Apr 2012 #9
It's not ProSense Apr 2012 #15
I'm not going to sit here and say that racism isn't a problem Aerows Apr 2012 #18
That's not ProSense Apr 2012 #24
Do you think the wealthy oligarchs Aerows Apr 2012 #27
Who ProSense Apr 2012 #32
I need to remind you of a lesson: the dividing up of Africa Zalatix Apr 2012 #60
Good grief ProSense Apr 2012 #67
No we don't live in Africa - but the politics of division is now worldwide. Zalatix Apr 2012 #153
The 99%ers are pretty diverse. The %ers divide us for their own purposes. libinnyandia Apr 2012 #8
Oh, no they're not. Where on earth did you get that idea? cali Apr 2012 #208
The 1%ers are not diverse but the rest of us are. White, black, Hispanic, men and women. libinnyandia Apr 2012 #218
Yep. Exactly. Taverner Apr 2012 #179
I'm going to rec this Autumn Apr 2012 #11
Sure ProSense Apr 2012 #13
See Post #2 Zalatix Apr 2012 #16
I saw it. n/t ProSense Apr 2012 #17
"much of this inequality and oppression is being driven by white men" Aerows Apr 2012 #19
That still ProSense Apr 2012 #30
No, that's YOUR POINT. Not THE point. SomethingFishy Apr 2012 #39
What a ProSense Apr 2012 #43
Holy shit you spend too much time on the internet... SomethingFishy Apr 2012 #46
Jeepers, we're fighting over ridiculous irrelevancies. Zalatix Apr 2012 #61
Your comment ProSense Apr 2012 #66
Percent of families owning slaves on the eve of the Civil War: HiPointDem Apr 2012 #99
Wow ProSense Apr 2012 #101
It's an ethnicity, one which historically hasn't always been coextensive with "white". FYI. HiPointDem Apr 2012 #102
I know, ProSense Apr 2012 #105
The content was that only 8% of American families owned slaves on the eve of the Civil War. HiPointDem Apr 2012 #106
Well, ProSense Apr 2012 #112
a white person was nearly as likely to die in the war to end slavery, as bart95 Apr 2012 #108
Oh my ProSense Apr 2012 #110
i will admit, however, that my ancestors were guilty bart95 Apr 2012 #114
'too much time on the internet...' bart95 Apr 2012 #116
What in the world...???... Number23 Apr 2012 #118
I agree. And this reality noiretextatique Apr 2012 #205
Run as fast as you can from this OP. Number23 Apr 2012 #209
LOL noiretextatique Apr 2012 #219
They also mostly vote republican redqueen Apr 2012 #22
It's a societal problem Aerows Apr 2012 #26
Look ProSense Apr 2012 #35
'It'd be nice if our fellow oppressed citizens would help out with that' bart95 Apr 2012 #109
"It's too bad we can't elect more progressive Dems." redqueen Apr 2012 #111
White men Dokkie Apr 2012 #171
Not only is that a great post Union Scribe Apr 2012 #20
Read your Marx and realize the truth hifiguy Apr 2012 #31
The religious "wars" have always been underlaid with economics. It's just that most HiPointDem Apr 2012 #103
Yeah, except Marx invented the proletariat, lumpenproletariat and petit bourgeoisie. joshcryer Apr 2012 #143
I don't agree with equality of the distress, but I do agree Lionessa Apr 2012 #34
This is part of what I was trying to say and encourage discussion about with this OP: stevenleser Apr 2012 #40
You're absolutely right, and we can see how effective it is right here in the replies. Egalitarian Thug Apr 2012 #41
Ah yes, ProSense Apr 2012 #44
Except the poster didn't say any of that. And this refusal to address the kind of points he makes HiPointDem Apr 2012 #48
What? ProSense Apr 2012 #49
Yes, I read his post, as well as your direct quote and your interpretation of its meaning. HiPointDem Apr 2012 #50
Well, ProSense Apr 2012 #55
Yes, people are free to interpret words in their "own way". People are also free to point out that HiPointDem Apr 2012 #63
Actually ProSense Apr 2012 #83
Demographically speaking, everyone is a victim of their circumstances. Zalatix Apr 2012 #54
You keep ProSense Apr 2012 #56
Because white men ARE separate from the Plutocracy!!! Zalatix Apr 2012 #57
Hmmm? ProSense Apr 2012 #62
"when income inequality wasn't as bad as it is now, say 40 years ago, who were the oppressors?" HiPointDem Apr 2012 #64
I know ProSense Apr 2012 #65
Do you know that? They owned slaves, eh? And was that the end of it? HiPointDem Apr 2012 #69
Wow, ProSense Apr 2012 #70
As you ascribed your "own interpretation" to the previous poster's words, so you've ascribed your HiPointDem Apr 2012 #71
Oh, I ProSense Apr 2012 #73
You're saying that white men and the plutocracy are coextensive categories? If so, that's so HiPointDem Apr 2012 #74
Oh, by ProSense Apr 2012 #81
So you *are* saying that "plutocracy" and "white males" are the same thing, then? I wasn't HiPointDem Apr 2012 #84
I have no earthly idea how you managed to get that out of what I wrote. Egalitarian Thug Apr 2012 #59
Well, ProSense Apr 2012 #68
Yes, but to be clear, they are not evil because they are white and/or male. Egalitarian Thug Apr 2012 #76
You know ProSense Apr 2012 #79
I'm sorry you feel that way. It is not my intention to dismiss or trivialize Egalitarian Thug Apr 2012 #86
AMEN! Dont call me Shirley Apr 2012 #52
Huge K&R abelenkpe Apr 2012 #53
I take your point but wickerwoman Apr 2012 #72
I'd argue that so long as the problem of economic justice isn't addressed or solved, no individual HiPointDem Apr 2012 #77
There again ProSense Apr 2012 #80
Where do I say that all other oppression is irrelevant? Where do I say that economic justice HiPointDem Apr 2012 #82
Oh, my bad ProSense Apr 2012 #85
Funny how we're fighting the battle of birth control again, eh? Why do you think that is? HiPointDem Apr 2012 #87
It's the ProSense Apr 2012 #90
LOL. Sure, keep telling yourself that. HiPointDem Apr 2012 #96
And economic justice won't be addressed or solved wickerwoman Apr 2012 #94
No one has asked anyone to give up their interests and needs. No one has ruled out "coalition" HiPointDem Apr 2012 #97
Are we reading the same website? wickerwoman Apr 2012 #181
Granted, it's going to take a lot of education and waking people up. Zalatix Apr 2012 #157
Your point is well-founded. Zalatix Apr 2012 #158
Yes, they are. But not because they are white or because they are male eridani Apr 2012 #75
I don't see white gays, white atheist, white whatever Obamacare Apr 2012 #78
No? HiPointDem Apr 2012 #89
Wow, some cops were actually charged with a crime for such an act. redqueen Apr 2012 #91
I suspect ProSense Apr 2012 #92
The poster didn't say that there is racial profiling and that blacks are a disproportionate % HiPointDem Apr 2012 #95
You're ProSense Apr 2012 #100
Your colors are being revealed HiPoint. joshcryer Apr 2012 #129
What colors are those? Unveil the veiled accusation. HiPointDem Apr 2012 #138
The true ones? joshcryer Apr 2012 #141
You made a veiled accusation. If you're not prepared to state it explicitly, why are you making it? HiPointDem Apr 2012 #142
How more explicit can I frame "true colors"? joshcryer Apr 2012 #144
The poster said: HiPointDem Apr 2012 #146
The poster implied that, absolutely. joshcryer Apr 2012 #148
Unlike yourself, I don't make broad assumptions about what people "mean" from one statement. HiPointDem Apr 2012 #149
It's basic linguistics, you interpret the meaning of what is said. Literalism... joshcryer Apr 2012 #187
Absolutely right loyalsister Apr 2012 #98
Love how the flaming amongst each other in this thread proves the exact point of your post. tjwash Apr 2012 #93
Pointing out disparities is NOT us being together. There are some progressive that don't think uponit7771 Apr 2012 #104
+1, "hard to convince these people to fight said disparities if they don't think they exist" joshcryer Apr 2012 #140
and it forces people to compete to 'out-victim' each other bart95 Apr 2012 #107
Yes, ProSense Apr 2012 #113
no, I think the OP is born out of exasperation of the endless blame bart95 Apr 2012 #115
So ProSense Apr 2012 #117
that post would be considered racist bart95 Apr 2012 #119
Don't ProSense Apr 2012 #120
what's absurd about it? being called out? nt bart95 Apr 2012 #121
Suggestion ProSense Apr 2012 #123
why? I already made my point bart95 Apr 2012 #124
Actually, ProSense Apr 2012 #125
'You made an utterly absurd claim' bart95 Apr 2012 #127
Here ProSense Apr 2012 #131
you interpreted the (bad thing) differently than I intended bart95 Apr 2012 #132
Well ProSense Apr 2012 #134
sorry pup bart95 Apr 2012 #136
Clearly ProSense Apr 2012 #137
And I'm not even a white male. Surprise. Zalatix Apr 2012 #151
all i really know bart95 Apr 2012 #166
How is electing the first African American President Obamacare Apr 2012 #182
that's how it was sold bart95 Apr 2012 #185
You should acknowledge why it's happening, though. joshcryer Apr 2012 #139
and employ posters to use the very tactic here RetroLounge Apr 2012 #165
Exactly right. lumberjack_jeff Apr 2012 #177
Oh, God. This thread... I weep for this web site. Or I would if I felt it had any hope at all. Number23 Apr 2012 #122
The rec's tell me all I needed to know. joshcryer Apr 2012 #128
+ 1 La Lioness Priyanka Apr 2012 #130
It's simple really. ProSense Apr 2012 #133
Exactly. joshcryer Apr 2012 #135
Nailed it ProSense Apr 2012 #145
What do you think about what President Obama said? Zalatix Apr 2012 #164
You know ProSense Apr 2012 #168
Your argument is illogical Zalatix Apr 2012 #172
Nonsense ProSense Apr 2012 #174
No, that's NOT what I said Zalatix Apr 2012 #200
these are all things that are routinely SwampG8r Apr 2012 #191
I weep for the fact that you can't see how the 1% is dividing us against each other. Zalatix Apr 2012 #150
Yes, it was the 1% that burned crosses in people's yards Number23 Apr 2012 #152
Post #47 said it right about you. Your staunch ignorance is exactly why the 1% prevails. Zalatix Apr 2012 #155
When you can prove it was the elite that inflicted Hell on black people's lives Number23 Apr 2012 #156
That's easy. Zalatix Apr 2012 #159
So the only people that perpetuated atrocities during the time of slavery Number23 Apr 2012 #188
i usually am in light disagreement with you SwampG8r Apr 2012 #192
"i can say this if you have seen it you cant unsee it" Number23 Apr 2012 #194
i came back by here SwampG8r Apr 2012 #220
I don't know where you got your education from Zalatix Apr 2012 #195
So I can infer that this weak, pointless, insignificant little insult is you Number23 Apr 2012 #196
Wait, you can dish out the insults but you can't take it? Zalatix Apr 2012 #197
You have not had one single "argument" to dispute Number23 Apr 2012 #198
Your wild eyed rants and raves are not "arguments", hence there is no dispute. Zalatix Apr 2012 #199
Oh God. Number23 Apr 2012 #203
Yes, run away with your tail between your legs. And take your laughable arguments with you. Zalatix Apr 2012 #204
Holy Hell... Number23 Apr 2012 #207
LOL I thought you said I wasn't worth another millisecond of your time. Zalatix Apr 2012 #211
President Obama said it even better than I did. So go ahead and hate on him, too. Zalatix Apr 2012 #162
Nonsense. n/t ProSense Apr 2012 #169
Post #47 says nothing about the poster you're talking to and nothing about ignorance. HiPointDem Apr 2012 #160
I'm sorry, I meant post #147. I forgot the "1" Zalatix Apr 2012 #161
Divide and conquer. joshcryer Apr 2012 #126
this whole thread is a prime example of how the dividing works. provis99 Apr 2012 #147
I'll let my avatar speak for me lunatica Apr 2012 #163
Poor whites still act racist Mosaic Apr 2012 #167
Poor, poor men who now have to be something more than white to be... polichick Apr 2012 #173
K&R One of the most interesting threads Waiting For Everyman Apr 2012 #180
Economic Justice IS the biggest Social Issue. bvar22 Apr 2012 #184
It's called divide and conquer...knr joeybee12 Apr 2012 #186
WHITE MEN brush stroke responses here are very broad. Zax2me Apr 2012 #190
Indeed, MLK Jr. did not say Zalatix Apr 2012 #193
Fucking A Tuesday Afternoon Apr 2012 #202
the op hit the nail 4 t 4 Apr 2012 #216

uponit7771

(93,505 posts)
1. We are NOT being oppressed equaly, lets give this one up, In EVERY society where theres a ruling...
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:02 PM
Apr 2012

...class majority of any one thing that ruling class will have a leg up.

As progressives we're not immune to take advantage of said "leg up" and we're most likely to point it out loudly but lets not dilute it into " we're all in the same boat" or deny it altogether which has been the MO on some threads regarding the issue on DU

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
2. Okay then
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:04 PM
Apr 2012

Let's just all get oppressed equally, would that make you happy?

Or how about we all stand together to stop our oppression instead of bickering about who has it worse?

uponit7771

(93,505 posts)
3. yes ..it would be ............progresss....... :-)
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:06 PM
Apr 2012

I don't think pointing at the disparities is an indication that we're not together, we're all going to learn...there are some people who are going to deny it all together because of lack of facts.

What I like about talking to progressives is facts matter more to them....


KKKons....not so much

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
10. I know there are disparities
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:19 PM
Apr 2012

but it's kind of like dwelling on the fact that somebody has a better position in the sweat shop because they can occasionally get fresh air when the door opens rather than working to end sweat shop conditions for everyone.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
45. +1. And that's exactly what the modern "rights" discourse encourages us to do. Not to mention
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 04:51 PM
Apr 2012

the 24-7 discourse of degradation, as evidenced in TV shows like "Judge Judy," drug tests for aid recipients, scapegoating of "privileged" public workers with "outrageous" benefits (which conveniently disappear the fact that blacks are disproportionately employed as public workers), etc.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
7. Nor is it
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:16 PM
Apr 2012

"You have it better than me, so until I have it just as good or bad as you do, you are part of the problem!"

Food for thought. I'm gay and a woman, so I most certainly understand the concept of people with privileges I don't have.

EFerrari

(163,986 posts)
12. Actually, I disagree.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:21 PM
Apr 2012

The first priority in a situation where there is racism is not the feelings of the oppressive group.

It shouldn't be or nothing would ever change.

If people personalize accurate generalizations about the group they are in, that is their boundary problem.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
14. So if there is sexism
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:26 PM
Apr 2012

and there is homophobia, that's just fine, but racism is a far bigger problem? Do you know how many gay and transgender people get bashed in this country every year? I don't think there is an LGBT person in the US that wasn't either bashed themselves, witnessed someone get bashed or knew someone who was bashed. We won't even go into civil rights issues gay people face.

My point is this - complaining that one subset of oppressed people gets better treatment than another subset of oppressed people is silly, and so is pointing fingers at each other.

We need to look for the ways to unite so that we can help each other all move past the bigotry and oppression, whatever oppression it may be, rather than look for reasons to stay divided.

EFerrari

(163,986 posts)
21. The first sentence of your post is straight out of your imagination
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:35 PM
Apr 2012

and not rooted in anything I have posted.

Your second point, one set of oppressed people complaining about another set of oppressed people, is also inaccurate. The fingering of white privilege is the rational observation of the status quo in this county since its inception. If you can't accept that, that is not a problem with the observation.

And as I already said, the first step toward standing together is not telling other people to shut up.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
23. It's not inaccurate at all
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:42 PM
Apr 2012

It is a societal problem in that we have an entrenched aristocracy that does mostly contain white men with all of the power. It's oligarchy. The biggest way to change that is through financial opportunity for all, not just the upper class, their cronies and sycophants.

EFerrari

(163,986 posts)
28. Entirely inaccurate.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:47 PM
Apr 2012

You may not find race or ethnicity a compelling viewpoint but that's your bias. And in attempting to invalidate that viewpoint, you are siding with the oligarchy and not with the people.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
33. Alrighty then
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:51 PM
Apr 2012

I'll take my privileged self and exit this entire thread since it appears that I am too bigoted, privileged and part of the oligarchy to understand the plight of oppressed people.

Feel free to disregard any of my comments, since I am far too privileged to take part in the discussion.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
36. Please do not exit... your points are logical.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 04:02 PM
Apr 2012

We need to fight for the 99% and stand our ground. You have my total support!

EFerrari

(163,986 posts)
88. Nope, there is nothing "logical" in arguing that people shouldn't push back
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:33 PM
Apr 2012

on racism because racism is only one slice of the oppression pie. And that's what Aerows was doing. Read those posts again.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
154. Racism is like a termite infestation. Nobody is arguing that the termites are not a problem.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 03:18 AM
Apr 2012

But you can't spray the termites and hope they go away. You have to go back to the nest and kill the queen. The queen is the Plutocracy.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
175. I said I wasn't going to even look in this thread, but I did
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 09:58 AM
Apr 2012

This is absolutely my last post in this thread, but I do have to respond to your comments EFerrari.

What you are accusing me of is racism by saying that I am invalidating the struggles against racism.

If in my near 7500 posts, mostly in general discussion THAT is the conclusion you come to about me, my motives for posting in this thread, and who I am in general, well you are welcome to your opinion.

I'll say this though - I think it says more about you than it does about me if you are accusing me of being a racist and attempting to invalidate or excuse racism.

Now, this is absolutely my last post here. Sorry to those who thought I made good points - I'm not going to hang around in a thread where I am being insulted, and I think I've been insulted enough in this thread when I have nothing but the best intentions regarding the DU community and the issues that are important to us.

REP

(21,691 posts)
51. I agree with your points
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:26 PM
Apr 2012

There's no "but." What you say reminds me of the saying about someone's two broken legs doesn't make my broken arm hurt less; as a disabled woman, I've had a small piece of the Discrimination Pie, but I know many others get a much bigger slice far more often - and having had that taste in my mouth, it makes me angry that anyone else does. We all have much more in common than we are different. All of us (in general - no fingers pointed except at myself) need to stop letting ourselves be distracted by these tiny differences - either manufactured or real.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
225. Discrimination Pie tastes no better in anyone's mouth
Sat Apr 28, 2012, 08:41 PM
Apr 2012

And it tastes much worse when there are people attempting to agitate a cohesive community like DU to further political gains.

We have such elements here, apparently, and it pisses me off that I was scolded by such and taken in by it.

 

Dokkie

(1,688 posts)
170. Dont go any where m8
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:16 AM
Apr 2012

I agree with the approach you are suggesting. As I black male, even I know that fighting issues like the drug war, bank bailout etc is infinitely more important than fighting racism but some irrelevant smuck who calls me names. We need to focus on the really big picture here.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
38. That is
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 04:12 PM
Apr 2012
You may not find race or ethnicity a compelling viewpoint but that's your bias. And in attempting to invalidate that viewpoint, you are siding with the oligarchy and not with the people.

...the exact goal of this argument. Spot on!

In fact, it's the argument used to invalidate policies to address discrimination.



 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
222. After the fact, thank you for acknowledging this
Sat Apr 28, 2012, 06:45 PM
Apr 2012

Don't know why I didn't see it before, and sorry I blasted you with venom before I did. Was just looking over this thread . You are alright Prosense, and sincere.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
221. "The first step toward standing together is not telling other people to shut up"
Sat Apr 28, 2012, 06:10 PM
Apr 2012

Indeed, you are quite correct and I suggest you look in the mirror.

redqueen

(115,186 posts)
5. We did.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:10 PM
Apr 2012

And women and minorities were reminded at these occupy encampments that many people still haven't unpacked all their privilege. It's hard to stand together shoulder to shoulder with someone while they're reminding you of their higher status.

It's not that people are "bickering over who has it worse", its that we're trying to get to the point where we're actually standing together.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
6. I'm a woman
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:15 PM
Apr 2012

and I'm a lesbian. I'm not the one who made a post complaining that other people have it better or worse than me. I made the post that we need to stand together, not be divided and oppressed, however much we are oppressed.

I think that is a good reminder for us all.

OriginalGeek

(12,132 posts)
29. You're both right
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:48 PM
Apr 2012

Aerows is right - we absolutely must stand together to even get started wiping out privilege and racism and sexism and classism and all the other isms.
Redqueen is right in that we absolutely must point it out when someone isn't getting it.

I am a straight, white male who was raised in a fundamentalist, christian home. I have privileges and bias built into me I don't even know about.

I didn't ask for them but I got them.
I don't deserve them but I got them.
I don't know I have some of them and I bet I've used them even if it just means someone else treated me better than one of you because I am all these things.

I need help people. I WANT to be right. I WANT to do the right thing. I WANT to behave correctly but I have had people all my life treat me like a white, straight male. I am not ashamed that I'm white or straight or male. I couldn't help any of those things. But I WANT to be ashamed if and when I ever use any of those things to get a leg up over someone else just because I am those things. I know I don't always recognize so I hope people like you folks will always be there to keep pointing it out.

I am a liberal Democrat because I do not believe most modern Republicans even have the decency to admit there might be a problem.

Anyone unwilling to face ALL the truths, even ugly ones, is doing life wrong.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
47. so long as the focus is primarily on the views of individuals, so long as the discourse of
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:02 PM
Apr 2012

"white privilege" is used primarily as a stick with which to poke individuals or fight it out for resources in a zero-sum game, i don't think things will change, just intensify.

King was assassinated when he moved to the discourse of economic justice for all and the organization of a multiracial coalition of the poor.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
189. I was instructed to your post for some reason
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 10:39 PM
Apr 2012

But I'm always fascinated by the DU Story that "King was only assassinated after he moved to the discourse of economic justice for all."

What does this mean and why is DU just about the only place in the entire world that I've heard people make these comments? Are we supposed to believe that MLK was killed not for his work as a black rights activist (the work that made him a household name, the work that garnered him a Nobel Prize, the work for WHICH HE WAS KILLED) but for his positions MUCH later in his career as an activist when he started speaking about expanding economic justice for everyone?

The entire raison d'etre of King's existence was "economic justice." I am always astounded when whites on this board conclude that his positions on the garbage workers was some kind of "shift" for him. King was ALL ABOUT economic and social justice for everybody, but that began and mostly ended with black people. The man OPENLY WEPT when he discussed making life better for little black girls and boys. This was his mission. What do you think the race of those sanitation workers mostly were? Heck, what race do you think is over represented in the sanitation industry TODAY in 2012?

Every time I see the "he wasn't killed until he began to move away from just focusing on black rights" it's all I can do not to laugh. It is not only insulting but it shows a profound ignorance, imo. King was REVILED by whites. White people called him the anti-Christ. A communist. A "black devil." But yet somehow, according to some on DU, it wasn't until he began expanding his message to include poor whites that TPTB suddenly decided he was a threat. For every white person that may have been receptive to King's message, there were probably 87,000 that wanted nothing to do with him. His work stopping the apartheid in the South is generally held as the reason he was assassinated. His message of economic and social justice expanded to all, but it BEGAN and held the highest priority with his own people.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
206. Please learn history: MLK Jr. was assassinated during his Poor People's Campaign
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 07:45 PM
Apr 2012

King was reviled by whites, but when he embarked on his anti-poverty campaign he pissed off an even more dangerous group: the Plutocrats.

Look at the time he was assassinated, and what he was doing. HiPointDem is right.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
210. After my exchange with you downthread
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 07:59 PM
Apr 2012

I wouldn't believe you if you said it was 5:30 after having just looked at your watch.

I am intimately familiar with King and his history which is why I asked the poster the question. And my comment was not directed to you in any way.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
212. After my exchange with you downthread
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 08:11 PM
Apr 2012

It's apparent that what you believe matters very little in the rational world.

Your familiarity with Dr. King, Jr. and his history is probably just as solid as whatever facts you dreamed up when you claimed that abolitionist whites weren't the mainstream even up to the outbreak of the Civil War.

So what if your comment wasn't directed to me? Your familiarity with Dr. King is probably as strong as your understanding that anyone can reply to any comment you make to someone here.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
213. You have nothing to say. You have no data. No facts. No information
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 08:17 PM
Apr 2012

Last edited Sat Apr 7, 2012, 08:54 PM - Edit history (1)

So don't bother responding to me. I will put as much thought into reading your posts as you did into writing them. Which is to say, absolutely none at all.

Edit: Totally appropriate and well-deserved insults removed.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
214. Whoops, I bothered responding to you. Now whatcha gonna do?
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 08:26 PM
Apr 2012

Temper, temper! I have facts. And cites, which you do not have.

http://www.channel3000.com/news/30224515/detail.html

MLK Spent His Last Days Fighting Poverty
Martin Luther King Jr.: Poverty Is A Civil Rights Battle
By Stephanie SiekCNN
Posted: 1:48 pm CST January 16, 2012
Updated: 3:08 pm CST January 16, 2012

When he died in Memphis, he was there to support fair wages and union representation for Memphis sanitation workers.


Now where are your cites to the contrary? Oh I know, in your roid-fueled rage you must have lost your bookmarks. Or some other excuse for why you have no counter argument.

Edit: At this rate maybe you'll wait FOREVER for a response from HiPointDem or any other rational person. I may be the only person willing to put up with your meltdowns.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
215. Nothing I have said in ANY way refutes what you've typed
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 08:38 PM
Apr 2012

Last edited Sat Apr 7, 2012, 09:47 PM - Edit history (1)

For the record, I will reiterate what I said to the OTHER POSTER, you know the one I'm actually interested in having a conversation with:


"The entire raison d'etre of King's existence was "economic justice." I am always astounded when whites on this board conclude that his positions on the garbage workers was some kind of "shift" for him. King was ALL ABOUT economic and social justice for everybody, but that began and mostly ended with black people. The man OPENLY WEPT when he discussed making life better for little black girls and boys. This was his mission. What do you think the race of those sanitation workers mostly were? Heck, what race do you think is over represented in the sanitation industry TODAY in 2012?"


The only thing worse than your deranged, completely out of control behavior in this thread is the rec count. Classic!!

Edit: Removed insults. Anyone reading this thread can see that I'm dealing with a very special individual and it's best not to be too unkind.
 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
217. "Nothing I have said in ANY way refutes what you've typed" <-- LOL!!!
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 08:45 PM
Apr 2012

That sentence doesn't mean what you think it does. You seriously need to step back, take a chill pill, and rethink your rants.

And that other poster? I'd be surprised if s/he wants to talk to you after the crybaby fits, caps-filled ragefests and frothing meltdowns you've had.

You wrote "YOU are the one that can't let my moniker go by without responding" but downthread you also wrote "You are not worth and will not receive one more millisecond of my time." You have no idea what a hypocrite you are by writing that.

And how about this. Why don't you try counting the number of people who call me an idiot and I will count the number of people who agree with me. Let's see which number is higher. It's already a foregone conclusion that your "2/3 is against Zalatix" is a wild eyed fantasy.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
223. Oh my
Sat Apr 28, 2012, 08:29 PM
Apr 2012

I'm curious why you DON'T acknowledge that he was shot during his campaign for economic justice.

I read what you had to say, but it amounted to insulting economic justice, and MLK's devotion to it. Ghandi had a similar approach.

Step up to the plate and tell us how horrible that approach to life is. I want to hear it, so I know what your values truly are.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
226. Three weeks after the post was posted, and you still couldn't bother to read it?
Sat Apr 28, 2012, 11:25 PM
Apr 2012

Why bother responding? And the arrogant challenge within your post in response to a post which you obviously didn't bother to read or didn't understand is absolutely priceless.

I'm curious why you DON'T acknowledge that he was shot during his campaign for economic justice.

Name one element, one cause, one march, one ANYTHING in relation to the Civil Rights Movement that was NOT about economic justice along with social justice, civil and basic rights. Wasn't the thrust of the ENTIRE Civil Rights Movement about economic parity among other things?

And I won't bother asking what your values are. I'm really not that interested.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
227. Well this came out of left field
Sun Apr 29, 2012, 07:18 PM
Apr 2012

But I'll bite. Rather than telling you what my values are, I'll SHOW them and not berate you on a message board. Show me yours, because ultimately, that is what defines us as human beings. What we do - not what we say we believe.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
228. I don't care about your values
Sun Apr 29, 2012, 08:25 PM
Apr 2012

Really.

And I have no interest in berating you on a message board. You initiated this because you couldn't understand the point I made to another poster three weeks ago and instead of simply asking for clarification, decided to edict some meaningless challenge.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
229. Values
Mon Apr 30, 2012, 02:14 AM
Apr 2012

I will always care about them. It is unfortunate that you see no need for values. I hope you turn from that path because it is a desolate one.

Peace be with you.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
230. Oh, and by the way?
Mon Apr 30, 2012, 02:20 AM
Apr 2012

I'm Aerows. Not the originator of the post, never an impostor, and if you believe I am a strange sock puppet, cher, you are wildly mistaken.

I am a donor to the site, have contributed to the site, and was a volunteer for this site. If you think for one second that you can call me anyone but who I am to this site, step up to the plate. I think you are projecting on that one, if you want the truth.

The ball is in your court, cher.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
231. You need to take another three weeks off
Tue May 1, 2012, 12:41 AM
May 2012

This entire exchange has been as idiotic as it is pointless.

I don't have the first clue what you're talking about with this "sock puppet" stuff and the "cher" references but please believe me when I tell you that as out of the blue and nonsensical as your comments are, they STILL don't interest me and neither do you or your "values" which you feel compelled to challenge people over for no reason. With all of that "cher" mess, you either you think I'm a fantastic 70s pop singer or you're Gambit from The X Men.

Either way, I am out the door. If you're looking for drama, you'll have to search elsewhere. Best of luck to you and whatever the hell all of this foolishness was about.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
233. Oh, and Gambit?
Tue May 1, 2012, 03:57 PM
May 2012

Yes, that's obviously the only human being that originated from Southern Louisiana. Certainly no one else came from there.

You may wish to evaluate your values - making fun of people - and your ideals if you think that poking fun at me will win you any esteem.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
234. And you may wish to evaluate leaping into a thread THREE WEEKS after it was started
Tue May 1, 2012, 04:05 PM
May 2012

And posting nonsensical gibberish to people who have no idea who you are and issuing idiotic challenges over values because you have nothing better to do. Nothing you have posted -- and I mean NOTHING -- has made even the slightest bit of sense or been even the tiniest bit interesting. And yet, you keep posting -- in duplicate even -- to me even though it is apparent that you have absolutely nothing to say.

I'm not poking fun at you. I am telling you exactly what I see in your posts. And it ain't nothing "fun" or even "funny" about it. I TRULY wish you would leave alone.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
236. Finally, something from you that makes sense.
Wed May 2, 2012, 12:39 AM
May 2012

Even if it is only a reiteration of something I've noted. No matter. I'll take an end to this idiocy any way I can take it.

Brooklyn Dame

(169 posts)
25. That's a great point.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:43 PM
Apr 2012

If people don't first acknowledge that, even in the trenches, some are 'more equal than others', then we're not going to truly stand together fight for common goals. There's discrimination that needs to be addressed on so many levels (and in areas that people don't commonly think of). Let's work on those and then battle the 1%.

http://borderlessnewsandviews.com/2012/04/flying-solo/

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
58. Battle and cripple the 1% and the other issues will resolve themselves.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:44 PM
Apr 2012

What you don't realize is it is the Plutocracy that is creating these inequalities.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
15. It's not
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:27 PM
Apr 2012

"Let's just all get oppressed equally, would that make you happy? "

...not about that. It's about trivializing oppression and using it as a red herring to create the impression that those responsible for the oppression are also oppressed, equating the 99% with "white men are being oppressed."

This is no different from that bogus argument pushed by Jim Webb. It's bullshit.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
18. I'm not going to sit here and say that racism isn't a problem
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:31 PM
Apr 2012

I'm also not going to sit here and say that homophobia isn't ALSO a rampant problem.

Beyond that, I'm also not going to get into an argument over which type of oppressed group has it better, because we have to unite to overcome it.

I didn't say that "white men are being oppressed". I did say that many of us are oppressed for different reasons. Tell me, do you think that a mentally ill homeless white man isn't being oppressed by the system in some way, or are you going to envy that person because he's a white male? How about the white gay male that gets beaten nearly to death on the street, but gets no justice - is he still privileged because he's a white man?

That was my point.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
24. That's not
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:43 PM
Apr 2012
Beyond that, I'm also not going to get into an argument over which type of oppressed group has it better, because we have to unite to overcome it.

I didn't say that "white men are being oppressed".

...the point, and the OP did say "white men are being oppressed."

The point is that someone is doing the oppressing, and almost every form of oppression, including income inequality, is driven mostly by white men.

Look at the group driving anti-gay, anti-immigrant, and anti-women sentiments, they are mostly white men. The division that's needed to continue oppression is being driven by white men. I guarantee that if white men were to suddenly change their position on these issues, oppression as it now see it would begin to be reversed.



 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
27. Do you think the wealthy oligarchs
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:46 PM
Apr 2012

Have any intention of relinquishing one bit of their power if we as a society don't come together and FORCE them to do so?

I don't. That's what the Occupy movement has been about, and it's a good foundation. That's what I meant by my comments about us working together, and what I also think the OP meant.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
60. I need to remind you of a lesson: the dividing up of Africa
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:52 PM
Apr 2012
http://www.freakonomics.com/2011/12/01/the-violent-legacy-of-africas-arbitrary-borders/

If you don't want to read the link, here is the short of it: When the European powers invaded Africa (the "Scramble for Africa&quot they divided up Africa into arbitrary borders and nations.

In so doing, they separated peoples and as a result they pitted many peoples against each other. The European powers would play favorites, giving privileges to one group while breeding resentment against them by other groups. As a result the given area would be divided against each other while the Europeans scored their plunder.

This is happening RIGHT NOW on a much larger scale. The world has been taken over by the Capitalists and everyone is being divided against each other, with whites and males being treated as the favored class du jour. In 2030 it has been EXPLICITLY stated that there will be a big fat Plutocrat global cashout and all those favored classes can kiss their asses goodbye along with everyone else.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
67. Good grief
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:10 PM
Apr 2012

"I need to remind you of a lesson: the dividing up of Africa"

Do we live in Africa?

If you don't want to read the link, here is the short of it: When the European powers invaded Africa (the "Scramble for Africa&quot they divided up Africa into arbitrary borders and nations.

In so doing, they separated peoples and as a result they pitted many peoples against each other. The European powers would play favorites, giving privileges to one group while breeding resentment against them by other groups. As a result the given area would be divided against each other while the Europeans scored their plunder.

This is happening RIGHT NOW on a much larger scale. The world has been taken over by the Capitalists and everyone is being divided against each other, with whites and males being treated as the favored class du jour. In 2030 it has been EXPLICITLY stated that there will be a big fat Plutocrat global cashout and all those favored classes can kiss their asses goodbye along with everyone else.

I heard there was once slavery in this country. And how exactly does "whites and males being treated as the favored class du jour" fit with "white men are being oppressed"? In fact, who is treating them as the "favored class du jour"? Herman Cain?

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
153. No we don't live in Africa - but the politics of division is now worldwide.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 03:11 AM
Apr 2012

It flourished in Africa but now the same tribalism is being exploited all over the world wherever Capitalism flourishes.

The Plutocracy picks tribal factions all over the place to serve as favorites and as the oppressed. In India it's much more overt in the form of the caste system. Here it's white men, who don't have to worry about being marginalized. But working class white men who did nothing to anyone are also under attack with "Hate whitey" rhetoric - this nobody can deny.

Many white men (not all) are guilty of ignoring racial profiling because they're privileged not to have to go through that. Many non-white people make racist jokes about whites, which is offensive to all the white people who did nothing to harm anyone. BOTH sides are ignorant of the fact that the problem is the PLUTOCRACY that has us all divided.

Since you're not getting it I'll repeat. Large numbers of white men need to understand that non-whites suffer from marginalization, racial profiling and a host of other white-centric discrimination. Large numbers of minorities need to focus their rage NOT on the millions of white men who have done absolutely nothing to oppress minorities. BOTH sides need to know that white privilege is a social construct created by the PLUTOCRACY.

This lesson needs to be learned and repeated between men and women, Christians and non-Christians, union and non-union workers, Americans and immigrants, and so on.

 

cali

(114,904 posts)
208. Oh, no they're not. Where on earth did you get that idea?
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 07:53 PM
Apr 2012

They're largely white and male. Yes, they have wives and children but still, that's the way it is. NPR just did a piece on this within the last couple of months.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
13. Sure
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:23 PM
Apr 2012
So are black men, gays, white women, straight people, black women, religious folks, Hispanic men and women, atheists... in fact, all of America's working class, 99% of our population, is being oppressed.

...white men are being so oppressed that they make more money than their counterparts in every economic category.

The net worth of white men is equivalent to the $5 net worth of black women.

False BS equivalency much?

The problem with your argument is that much of this inequality and oppression is being driven by white men, including many who are not in the top one percent.


Good grief.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
19. "much of this inequality and oppression is being driven by white men"
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:34 PM
Apr 2012

Now you've got it. BUT there are white men that are willing to stand with the rest of us that aren't white men, and pushing away their help in standing in unity with the rest of us is counterproductive.

Some people get that, some people don't seem to get it yet.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
30. That still
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:49 PM
Apr 2012
Now you've got it. BUT there are white men that are willing to stand with the rest of us that aren't white men, and pushing away their help in standing in unity with the rest of us is counterproductive.

Some people get that, some people don't seem to get it yet.

...doesn't change the fact that they are driving the oppression. In fact, the entire argument falls apart under than logic there are people among the top one percent who stand with the 99 percent.

That's not the point. The point is oppression is being driven by white men, as it always has been.





SomethingFishy

(4,876 posts)
39. No, that's YOUR POINT. Not THE point.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 04:30 PM
Apr 2012

THE point is we are all mostly getting fucked over and need to stand together to gain ground. THat was the point of the OP. But as usual you needed to make it YOUR point.. and your point is: "WHITE MEN DID IT".

Yes they did. But not all of them and you are a fool for throwing away the support of those willing to stand with you. And you are throwing it away with YOUR POINT which is.... WHITE MEN DID IT!

Oh and by the way pay a visit to some countries in Africa where "BLACK MEN DID IT."


Or check out history where WOMEN DID IT..

Oppressors through out history have come in every size, shape, color and gender. Grow up. The USA is not the only country on the planet.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
43. What a
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 04:36 PM
Apr 2012
THE point is we are all mostly getting fucked over and need to stand together to gain ground. THat was the point of the OP. But as usual you needed to make it YOUR point.. and your point is: "WHITE MEN DID IT".

Yes they did.
But not all of them and you are a fool for throwing away the support of those willing to stand with you. And you are throwing it away with YOUR POINT which is.... WHITE MEN DID IT!


...disjointed comment..

Oh and by the way pay a visit to some countries in Africa where "BLACK MEN DID IT."


Or check out history where WOMEN DID IT..

"Black men" in Africa are oppressing us?

WTF?


SomethingFishy

(4,876 posts)
46. Holy shit you spend too much time on the internet...
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 04:59 PM
Apr 2012

Quote you: "That's not the point. The point is oppression is being driven by white men, as it always has been."

As it ALWAYS HAS BEEN.

BULLSHIT It's not always WHITE MEN doing the oppressing. You claimed it was. Pardon me if you actually meant that YOU were always oppressed by white men. Or that you were only talking about America. See I never thought this thread was about you I thought it was about fighting oppression in general.

However you came in and decided it wasn't about getting together to fight oppression, you decided it was about "white men are always the oppressors, always have been". You posted it, you said it, and when someone actually tried to tell you that not all white men are like that and that you shouldn't ignore their help you had to come back with "oppression is being driven by white men, as it always has been." You couldn't even admit that not all white men are out to oppress you.

Now please go ahead and tell me you are still confused. It's a cute ploy.



 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
61. Jeepers, we're fighting over ridiculous irrelevancies.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:56 PM
Apr 2012

Who cares whether it's been white men who are doing the oppressing. It's not relevant.

The white male has been picked by the Plutocracy as the golden child. When they get ready to cash out the white male will be the redheaded stepchild like everyone else.

Most Plutocrats HAPPEN to be white. But they are not loyal to whites. They are loyal to green. 99% of all whites will get flushed down the toilet when they're done, along with everyone else.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
66. Your comment
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:05 PM
Apr 2012
Quote you: "That's not the point. The point is oppression is being driven by white men, as it always has been."

As it ALWAYS HAS BEEN.

BULLSHIT It's not always WHITE MEN doing the oppressing. You claimed it was. Pardon me if you actually meant that YOU were always oppressed by white men. Or that you were only talking about America. See I never thought this thread was about you I thought it was about fighting oppression in general.

...makes no sense. In this country, the slave owners were white men. The institutions are still owned by white men.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
99. Percent of families owning slaves on the eve of the Civil War:
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:15 PM
Apr 2012
http://www.civil-war.net/pages/1860_census.html

Eight percent of American families owned slaves on the eve of the Civil War. Even in the South, slave-owners were the minority.

The slave owners were *rich* white men. Not to mention Spanish men and Jewish men, and occasionally black men, and occasionally women from all the categories above. The thing they had in common was generally that they were wealthier than average, with the majority of slaves held by the very wealthy.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
101. Wow
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:18 PM
Apr 2012
The slave owners were *rich* white men. Not to mention Spanish men and Jewish men, and occasionally black men, and occasionally women from all the categories above. The thing they had in common was generally that they were wealthier than average, with the majority of slaves held by the very wealthy.

Jewish is a race?

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
102. It's an ethnicity, one which historically hasn't always been coextensive with "white". FYI.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:35 PM
Apr 2012

"Spanish" isn't a race either, but it's an ethnicity/nationality that hasn't always been coextensive with "white".

For that matter, "race" itself is kind of an invented category without firm basis in physical facts.

But way to ignore the content in favor of your silly little jabs, as usual.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
105. I know,
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:48 PM
Apr 2012

"For that matter, "race" itself is kind of an invented category without firm basis in physical facts."

...if we could get rid of the invention of "race," there would be no racism, and no white men, only ethnicity/nationality, you know, like Spanish men and Jewish men.

"But way to ignore the content in favor of your silly little jabs, as usual."

Maybe it's because the "content" is silly.




 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
106. The content was that only 8% of American families owned slaves on the eve of the Civil War.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:51 PM
Apr 2012

Contra your cartoon pictures of history and its relation to the present.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
112. Well,
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:15 PM
Apr 2012
The content was that only 8% of American families owned slaves on the eve of the Civil War.

Contra your cartoon pictures of history and its relation to the present.

...that clearly proves that white men are oppressed!

 

bart95

(488 posts)
108. a white person was nearly as likely to die in the war to end slavery, as
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:04 PM
Apr 2012

they were to have owned slaves in the first place, even if they had nothing to do with slavery in the first place, their entire lives

new figures show over 700,000 dead

25 million white population in 1861

700,000/25,000,000 = .028 percent vs 8 percent

and countless more injured, and years of service given by people who werent injured

yet, decendents of all are 'guilty'

even if their ancestors came after the war was over

(by definition, if your ancestors saw the statue of liberty when they came here, they came decades after the war)

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
110. Oh my
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:13 PM
Apr 2012
a white person was nearly as likely to die in the war to end slavery, as they were to have owned slaves in the first place, even if they had nothing to do with slavery in the first place, their entire lives


...the debate seems to have taken a statistical turn away from oppression.

Do you have statistic to correlate how many whites died trying to end slavery compared to how many blacks/slaves died or were killed?

Next up: whites had it harder than slaves.

 

bart95

(488 posts)
114. i will admit, however, that my ancestors were guilty
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:18 PM
Apr 2012

because upon their arrival in the late 1850s to the non slave north, they did not achieve dictatorial powers the moment they arrived to end slavery.

 

bart95

(488 posts)
116. 'too much time on the internet...'
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:32 PM
Apr 2012

at 82,000 posts

figure 10 minutes per post = 13,666 hours

2000 working hours in a year

13,666/2000 = 6.8 years - on this site alone

'pro' indeed!

Number23

(24,544 posts)
118. What in the world...???...
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:40 PM
Apr 2012
Oh and by the way pay a visit to some countries in Africa where "BLACK MEN DID IT."

And that relates to the 400 year old issue of racial and gender inequality in America.... how, exactly??

noiretextatique

(27,275 posts)
205. I agree. And this reality
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 07:43 PM
Apr 2012

does not negate the fact that some white men are being oppressed. however, it is true that the 1% is mostly white and male. and there is nothing divisive or controversial about saying that.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
209. Run as fast as you can from this OP.
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 07:54 PM
Apr 2012

First, make sure you read all of the OPs comments. And then when you're done either laughing or weeping for the state of this nation, hit trash thread and don't come back. It is TRULY not worth it.

noiretextatique

(27,275 posts)
219. LOL
Sun Apr 8, 2012, 12:59 PM
Apr 2012

we are all being oppressed by the 1%...i have no problem with that notion. however, that doesn't negate the isms others face. i doubt that the murderer in oklahoma is a kazillionaire, and i don't think he's targeted black people because we have oppressed him.

redqueen

(115,186 posts)
22. They also mostly vote republican
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:36 PM
Apr 2012

gee, its too bad that we are forcing them to side with our common oppressors, isn't it?
It's too bad we can't elect more progressive Dems. It'd be nice if our fellow oppressed citizens would help out with that.

 

Aerows

(39,961 posts)
26. It's a societal problem
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:44 PM
Apr 2012

And frankly, the oligarchy and the entrenched aristocracy which mostly consists of white men, their cronies and sycophants have a very tight grip on us all, and everyone who wants to change the situation.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
35. Look
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:55 PM
Apr 2012

It's a societal problem And frankly, the oligarchy and the entrenched aristocracy which mostly consists of white men, their cronies and sycophants have a very tight grip on us all, and everyone who wants to change the situation.

...at the composition of Congress. Look at the Governorships. There is only one black Governor, MA, and he cannot run for re-election.

Who does the oligarchy use to carry out its agenda: white men.

 

bart95

(488 posts)
109. 'It'd be nice if our fellow oppressed citizens would help out with that'
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:10 PM
Apr 2012

it'd be even nicer if the party didnt sell us out with globalism

 

Dokkie

(1,688 posts)
171. White men
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:28 AM
Apr 2012

have no choice in this society but to be survives. They are no programs, no charities, no shelters that are created to carter to then when they run into trouble. Its every white man for himself and that is why their adaption leads them to be hard working, independent and strong. If they dared mess up, they very likely to end up homeless or committing suicide. Its not a easy life but somehow they make it seem so easy.

If I could be turned into anything, I wouldn't turn into a white man, I would instead turn into a beautiful white woman. Now that's one group that got it good

 

hifiguy

(33,688 posts)
31. Read your Marx and realize the truth
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:49 PM
Apr 2012

All forms of oppression, except perhaps the religulously motivated, come down to economics. The attempt to apply (twist, actually), the Marxist analysis to sub-groups both dilutes the core of Marx's universalist critique and serves as another way to set oppressed group against oppressed group.

The key lesson to be taken from Marx is that everything, and the Rock means everything, comes down to economic exploitation of the masses by the capitalist 1% class.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
103. The religious "wars" have always been underlaid with economics. It's just that most
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:40 PM
Apr 2012

Americans have only been taught the story from a solely religious perspective. "These people just believed something different about god than those people, and were persecuted..." Pablum.

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
143. Yeah, except Marx invented the proletariat, lumpenproletariat and petit bourgeoisie.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 10:30 PM
Apr 2012

The key is that he used those subgroups to explicitly pit them against one another, whereas practical progressivism tries to solve issues within subgroups because society as a whole is not going to magically change. White people aren't suddenly going to refuse the privileges that they have based upon their cultural place in society. I'm not going to, for example, tell the cashier to check my $20 bill after having just checked the $20 bill of the colored person in front of me. I'm going to sigh as they put the $20 bill in the register without even giving it a second thought and maybe hate myself a little for noticing that and not using it as an opportunity to teach a lesson, because the cashier probably wouldn't even know what they did, and I'm timid in real life.

 

Lionessa

(3,894 posts)
34. I don't agree with equality of the distress, but I do agree
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 03:53 PM
Apr 2012

that regardless of whose more downtrodden, we need to work together, the 99%, to get anything worthwhile done, and if we do that together, there's a higher chance we'll stay together in the future as we grow, keeping those benefits and future stresses much more equal across all perceived lines.

 

stevenleser

(32,886 posts)
40. This is part of what I was trying to say and encourage discussion about with this OP:
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 04:33 PM
Apr 2012
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002481211

The only group that truly has privilege, in my humble opinion, is straight, white, wealthy, christian males.

Everyone else has aspects of their background or microeconomics that cause them to be a certain distance away from the privileged group. It does no good for a middle class straight white woman to accuse a middle class straight black male, or middle class gay white male of having 'male privilege'. Those three groups are all pretty equidistant away from the privileged group. The black man could respond that the woman has white privilege and the gay man could reply that the woman has straight privilege. None of those accusations are helpful.

It becomes more complicated when you try to compare people with a mix of different races, gender, LGBT status and wealth.

Nor does the amount of privilege or lack of it mean that anyone is necessarily good or bad or necessarily going to be a success or failure. I know plenty of straight, white, wealthy, christian males that are great people. I know folks who started far from the privileged group who have become very happy and financially successful.
 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
41. You're absolutely right, and we can see how effective it is right here in the replies.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 04:35 PM
Apr 2012

"I'm so outraged that my oppression is worse than your oppression that your oppression doesn't count!"

This scam only works because we are all so angry and so we spread the misery around. I know I've done it and I see others do it every day.

How often have you seen someone rage about the fact that the parasite class is not 100% white? The guilty are mostly men and mostly white, but is that because they are white and male, or is it because they have been in the game longer? The worst company I ever worked for was owned and run by a woman, a white woman that was born into the parasite class and used that advantage to create a company that breaks almost every labor law in this nation every day. A company that steals from its clients, its workers, and the government, yet is never prosecuted because every investigation is killed by those to whom she has connections.

Yes, it's worse if you are brown, and it's even worse if you are a woman, and worse still if you are a brown woman. And if you are that brown woman, is your oppression inflicted on you by the brown man? Maybe in your case it is, but if you keep going up the chain you're going to find one of these parasites that has been oppressing everybody for generations, and getting more and more powerful that whole time while you're concentrating your rage on the asshole right above you.

Just who is that white guy that has been laid off for the fourth time in this, his third career, oppressing?

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
44. Ah yes,
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 04:42 PM
Apr 2012
How often have you seen someone rage about the fact that the parasite class is not 100% white? The guilty are mostly men and mostly white, but is that because they are white and male, or is it because they have been in the game longer? The worst company I ever worked for was owned and run by a woman, a white woman that was born into the parasite class and used that advantage to create a company that breaks almost every labor law in this nation every day. A company that steals from its clients, its workers, and the government, yet is never prosecuted because every investigation is killed by those to whom she has connections.

...oppression is natural, and white men are innocent, they're only victims of their circumstance.

What bullshit!

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
48. Except the poster didn't say any of that. And this refusal to address the kind of points he makes
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:08 PM
Apr 2012

is part of the problem.

He has acknowleged the reality of "white privilege" (or minority disprivilege) clearly in his post, but you pretend he's said something entirely the opposite.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
49. What?
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:13 PM
Apr 2012

"Except the poster didn't say any of that. And this refusal to address the kind of points he makes"

It's a direct quote, and my comment. You can apply your own meaning to the direct quote, but that is how I read it.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
50. Yes, I read his post, as well as your direct quote and your interpretation of its meaning.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:23 PM
Apr 2012

All I can say is that his post overtly contradicts your "interpretation".

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
55. Well,
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:29 PM
Apr 2012
Yes, I read his post, as well as your direct quote and your interpretation of its meaning.

All I can say is that his post overtly contradicts your "interpretation".

...at least you acknowledge the direct quote. Like I said, you can interpret it in your own way. I say it's bullshit.

I mean, the poster is agreeing with the OP, and if you haven't noticed, I don't agree.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
63. Yes, people are free to interpret words in their "own way". People are also free to point out that
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:58 PM
Apr 2012

the interpretation is directly contradicted by the words themselves.

Unless you're arguing for your own private linguistics, the post directly contradicts your "interpretation".

Everything is not just a matter of opinion.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
83. Actually
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:11 PM
Apr 2012
Yes, people are free to interpret words in their "own way". People are also free to point out that

the interpretation is directly contradicted by the words themselves.

Unless you're arguing for your own private linguistics, the post directly contradicts your "interpretation".

Everything is not just a matter of opinion.

...it appears you're arguing that your interpretation is the right interpretation. I mean, "linguistics"? Really?

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
54. Demographically speaking, everyone is a victim of their circumstances.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:29 PM
Apr 2012

White men have been selected by the Plutocracy to be their vessels of domination. The time will come when that is totally undone. That I can guarantee you.

The color that really matters with the Plutocracy is green.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
56. You keep
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:36 PM
Apr 2012
White men have been selected by the Plutocracy to be their vessels of domination. The time will come when that is totally undone. That I can guarantee you.

The color that really matters with the Plutocracy is green.

...making statements that attempt to separate white men from the "Plutocracy."

I mean, when income inequality wasn't as bad as it is now, say 40 years ago, who were the oppressors? You talk as if something has changed since then with regard to the driving force.

Again, your entire argument is to trivialize the plight of the truly oppressed with a false equivalency. Yes, the poor come in all stripes. Yes, there is a huge gap between the 99 percent and the top on percent, but that doesn't change the fact that white men are driving the oppression.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
57. Because white men ARE separate from the Plutocracy!!!
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:42 PM
Apr 2012

Are you a Plutocrat? Are any of the white men you know a part of the Plutocracy? No. Chances are 100% of the white men you know are struggling like everyone else. MAYBE LESS SO, but still, the axe can fall at any moment upon any one of them.

Herman Cain ain't white.

They're predicting a global depression and population crash in 2030. This is a big fat setup, ProSense. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/next-great-depression-mit-researchers-predict-global-economic-190352944.html

White people may be better off today, but when 2030 hits and the Plutocracy starts cashing humanity out with a whole slew of manufactured (read: PHONY) shortages, 99% of all whites will be the (racist word of the day) along with everyone else. It won't mean a hill of beans whether whites have it better than blacks - we'll all be flushed out.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
62. Hmmm?
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:57 PM
Apr 2012
Because white men ARE separate from the Plutocracy!!!

Are you a Plutocrat? Are any of the white men you know a part of the Plutocracy? No. Chances are 100% of the white men you know are struggling like everyone else. MAYBE LESS SO, but still, the axe can fall at any moment upon any one of them.

Herman Cain ain't white.

They're predicting a global depression and population crash in 2030. This is a big fat setup, ProSense. http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/next-great-depression-mit-researchers-predict-global-economic-190352944.html

White people may be better off today, but when 2030 hits and the Plutocracy starts cashing humanity out with a whole slew of manufactured (read: PHONY) shortages, 99% of all whites will be the (racist word of the day) along with everyone else. It won't mean a hill of beans whether whites have it better than blacks - we'll all be flushed out.


So "Herman Cain ain't white" means that blacks are the oppressors? First, I'm not white and not male.

See, that's your entire point: White men are oppressed because some white men are struggling. It's a false equivalency because in an all white nation, there would be people struggling.

Let's discuss the myth of white privilege.

From the OP:

Yes, white men are being oppressed.

So are black men, gays, white women, straight people, black women, religious folks, Hispanic men and women, atheists... in fact, all of America's working class, 99% of our population, is being oppressed.

You see, that's not a "we're all in this together statement" because you used the title to invalidate notion that white men are the oppressors and to invalidate the struggles of other groups as equivalent. You were making a point about income inequality, but you made the emphasis a false equivalency. Like I said up thread, it's the same argument used by white men to attack policies that address discrimination and inequality.

Webb Calls For White Americans To End ‘Government Directed Diversity Programs’

Our guest blogger is Sam Fulwood III, a Senior Fellow with the Center for American Progress Action Fund.

Maybe Sen. James Webb, the Democratic senator from Virginia, didn’t understand that what he was saying made him sound like a mossback from the last century. In a bizarre and unfortunate opinion article published in Friday’s Wall Street Journal. I’m being charitable because surely the Democratic senator from Virginia didn’t mean to sound as bigoted as the article makes him seem. No, surely he wasn’t arguing that white Americans suffer from federal policies that favor everyone but themselves.

“Those who came to this country in recent decades from Asia, Latin America and Africa did not suffer discrimination from our government, and in fact have frequently been the beneficiaries of special government programs,” Webb wrote, arguing for a retreat from those unspecified federal programs. “The same cannot be said of many hard-working white Americans, including those whose roots in America go back more than 200 years.”

Beyond being grossly ignorant about the current effects of what he calls “present-day diversity programs,” Webb is engaging in reckless racial inversion. While he carefully exculpates black Americans, whom he describes as “still in need,” Webb makes a scurrilous case that white Americans – southerners and Baptists, in particular – are being harmed by nonwhite groups who receive “special consideration in a wide variety of areas including business startups, academic admissions, job promotions and lucrative government contracts.” His solution is a call for white people to unite and end “government directed diversity programs.”

Clearly, Webb is unaware that affirmative actions programs have been effectively dismantled by the Supreme Court. But worse, he’s oblivious to the fact that his screed treads dangerously close to the discredited divide-and-conqueror tactics of the Southern strategy. In this new formation, Webb pits the sweeping and swelling segments of America’s immigrant population against native-born Americans with the aim of rallying the nation’s “white cultures.”

If he thinks this is a necessary step toward racial healing, especially after the week the nation’s just had, then he’s even more misguided than his article reveals. Somebody, perhaps one of his congressional colleagues, needs to tell Sen.Webb to get his head out of the last, sad epoch of covert racist talk and join the rest of America in the 21st century.

http://wonkroom.thinkprogress.org/2010/07/23/webb-wsj/


 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
64. "when income inequality wasn't as bad as it is now, say 40 years ago, who were the oppressors?"
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:00 PM
Apr 2012

The plutocracy. Same as it's ever been.


 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
69. Do you know that? They owned slaves, eh? And was that the end of it?
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:19 PM
Apr 2012

"I'll add another point: This conceptualization of "white privilege" actually disappears its main movers & beneficiaries.

I don't deny that there's something like "white skin privilege" that applys to white americans generally, as well as something like "black skin disprivilege" that we see in cases like Trayvon Martin's.

But in the place of a more pointed analysis, the idea of "white privilege" offers a narrative of diffuse collective guilt, not necessarily for *doing* anything in particular, but just for being born white. That provides lots of fodder for serious racists and nazis and is in that sense seriously counter-productive. So lets look a little deeper.

Profits from the slave system built the elite universities and financed the industrial revolution and the railroads, generating more profits which continue to finance the expansion of capital in the present day. And the people who profited, and continue to profit from that capital, aren't, by in large, your average working joe. They're today's upper classes. But we're not often encouraged to think about those connections.

Some examples of what I'm talking about:

Brown Brothers (now Brown Brothers Harriman) made bank on slavery -- major cotton broker, financed plantations, owned slaves as tradeable goods. Offices in NY, Baltimore, Liverpool and Philadelphia -- all locations related to the trade in slaves and slave-produced goods. The slave system generated vast wealth for the partners. They invested it and made more money, and their descendants after them, and new partners (like Prescott Bush) that came into that nexus of capital.

Do THESE people accept any guilt, any charge of "white privilege"? Not at all:

Donald Murphy, a partner, says the investment bank has no pre-Civil War records and sees no need to go through its records. "As an institution, I and my partners could look you in the eye and say we abhor that slavery ever existed in this or any other country. And yet I don't feel qualified to comment on practices and actions of a different society of 175 years ago," he says.


http://www.usatoday.com/money/general/2002/02/21/slave-brown-bros.htm

Nothing to do with *him*. All so long ago.


A couple of other random examples (there are many):

The Roosevelts' initial fortune came from the sugar business, back in the days of Dutch NY and colonial times. Slaves in the west indies grew the cane, and slaves in NY (about 20% of NY's population at the time) refined the sugar.

Isaac Roosevelt helped found the Bank of NY with the profits, and that bank undoubtably financed other slave-related ventures. Bank of NY was the first corporate stock traded on the NY stock exchange.

The Bushes
benefited from slavery through their ancestors, the Fays. Prescott Bush's grandpa James married Harriet Fay. Her father was a Savannah cotton broker, and so were two of his brothers; the house was Padelford and Fay, circa 1820-1858. It was a US agent for Baring Brothers, which at the time was the second-biggest financial house in the world. The Quaker Barings had made a lot of their money financing -- what else -- the slave trade.

There's even a bit of evidence that the Fays themselves might have had some direct involvement in the slave trade.

For example, the Wanderer was the last known ship to bring slaves to the US. Harriet Fay Bush's uncle Joseph Story Fay acted as agent and guarantor for Charles Lamar (the ship's owner) when the ship was seized -- and the Fays and Lamars had personal and business connections that went back to Charles Lamar's grandfather.

The Fays were originally from Massachusetts. The family got involved in business in Georgia (steamboats and shipping to begin with) at about the same time that their cousin Eli Whitney (Yalie and second cousin of Harriet's great grandpa Jonathan, both born in the same town of under 1000 people) started ginning cotton there.

The cotton gin "boomed" the South, and those who got in on the action early, as usual, did best. The Fays invested their cotton profits in the northern textile industry and railroads, among other things.

James Smith Bush's marriage to Harriet Fay connected the Bushes to national and international business interests, rather than the merely regional ones they'd been associated with up to then. I peg it as the beginning of their rise to real power.

Samuel Prescott Bush was the next generation, associated with railroads, Rockefellers, and Harrimans, chair of the War Industries Board and a board member of the Federal Reserve of Cleveland. Quite a leap for a preacher's son -- all due to his native talent, I'm sure.

Ever hear the Bushes apologizing for their white skin privilege? People like the Bushes have the privilege of never having to apologize for their privilege.

White skin privilege? No, they're the civil rights leaders of our time!

And education outcomes is the distinguishing feature between the haves and have-nots. I would argue that education reform should be the great civil rights challenge of this time.


http://www.theshorthorn.com/index.php/news/university/29772-former-florida-governor-jeb-bush-discusses-educational-reform-and-politics


There's a reality to "white privilege," just as there's a reality to "pointy-headed elites," but the way those concepts are used in popular discourse is often diversionary, divisive, and counter-productive.

On edit: The present-day failure to point out which class was the creator and major beneficiary of the slave system, in favor of a diffused narrative of "white privilege" is telling, as is the tendency of many liberals to ignore that point, as ProSense did in her response to this post.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
70. Wow,
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:25 PM
Apr 2012

thanks for the list of white men and pointing out that the country was built on slavery.

I did not know that!

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
71. As you ascribed your "own interpretation" to the previous poster's words, so you've ascribed your
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:29 PM
Apr 2012

"own interpretation" to my post. It had nothing to do with pointing out that the country was built on slavery by white men.

There are several reasons I can think of for your repeated misinterpretation. I won't list them, but they're pretty obvious.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
73. Oh, I
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:34 PM
Apr 2012

understood your point, it's a long excuse.

In fact, this part was interesting

But in the place of a more pointed analysis, the idea of "white privilege" offers a narrative of diffuse collective guilt, not necessarily for *doing* anything in particular, but just for being born white. That provides lots of fodder for serious racists and nazis and is in that sense seriously counter-productive. So lets look a little deeper.

Yeah, and I got the "examples."

You see, any excuse will do: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=522460

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
74. You're saying that white men and the plutocracy are coextensive categories? If so, that's so
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:38 PM
Apr 2012

ridiculous that the only suitable response is uproarious laughter.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
84. So you *are* saying that "plutocracy" and "white males" are the same thing, then? I wasn't
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:11 PM
Apr 2012

sure.

That's so contra-reality that there's no point in discussion.

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
59. I have no earthly idea how you managed to get that out of what I wrote.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 05:51 PM
Apr 2012

your conclusion is the exact opposite of what I said, so let me clarify this for you.

Oppression is unnatural, rather it is the result of manipulation by oppressors.

The fact that most of those oppressors are white and male is not caused by being white or male, rather it the result of the imposition of oppression by evil people that are, mostly, white and male.


Mahatma Gandhi said, "A nation's culture resides in the hearts and in the soul of its people."

What is in your heart?

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
68. Well,
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:14 PM
Apr 2012
Oppression is unnatural, rather it is the result of manipulation by oppressors.

The fact that most of those oppressors are white and male is not caused by being white or male, rather it the result of the imposition of oppression by evil people that are, mostly, white and male.

...that clears it up. I mean, I know there is evil, and oppression is evil. The fact still remains, and you agree, the oppressors are "mostly, white and male," the evil ones.

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
76. Yes, but to be clear, they are not evil because they are white and/or male.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:48 PM
Apr 2012

I get that you're angry, and justifiably so. But this is not about race or sex, it is about a tiny parasitic minority that has, for centuries, successfully manipulated most of us into blaming each other for what they do to us. While we fight each other, they just keep taking more and more.

There is more than enough for everyone, just not enough for the few to have so much more.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
79. You know
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:58 PM
Apr 2012
Yes, but to be clear, they are not evil because they are white and/or male.

I get that you're angry, and justifiably so. But this is not about race or sex, it is about a tiny parasitic minority that has, for centuries, successfully manipulated most of us into blaming each other for what they do to us. While we fight each other, they just keep taking more and more.

There is more than enough for everyone, just not enough for the few to have so much more

...that's quite condescending. Again, trying to dismiss racism and sexism ("this is not about race or sex&quot by telling people to fight a "tiny parasitic minority" is trivializing those issues.

 

Egalitarian Thug

(12,448 posts)
86. I'm sorry you feel that way. It is not my intention to dismiss or trivialize
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:25 PM
Apr 2012

this/these issue(s). Rather, I want to point out that they are symptoms of a common disease.
You will never cure a disease by treating the symptoms. To cure the illness you have to heal the cause, and to heal the cause you must first identify it.

Haven't we been stuck in this cycle long enough? If not now, when? If not us, who?

wickerwoman

(5,662 posts)
72. I take your point but
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:34 PM
Apr 2012

not all oppression comes from the same source and not all oppression will find redress in the same way. It's quite a bit more complicated than that.

I'm in the minority in being female, an atheist and from a working class background. You're suggesting I ignore sexism and religious chauvinism in order to address classism but even if I "succeed" at that I'm still treated as a minority on two out of three counts. How do I trade an increase in the minimum wage against abortion rights or separation of church and state?

Solving the problem of economic injustice (if such a thing is even possible) isn't automatically going to solve social, racial or religious injustice.

How can I get motivated to overthrow the WASP plutocracy by sacrificing my own interests to "unite" with white male straight fundamentalist Christians just so they can take over instead? Frankly, I think we're better off with the Mitt Romneys of the world than the Jim Bob Duggars.

Sorry, but this argument just reminds me of all the people telling gay people not to be "pushy" about marriage equality because "the time isn't right" or "we have bigger fish to fry". Asking other groups to set aside their pain and their history so that they can be a part of your "unifying" agenda is just wrong. Let people come to that decision on their own and on their own terms.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
77. I'd argue that so long as the problem of economic justice isn't addressed or solved, no individual
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:51 PM
Apr 2012

gains will stick. Because economic injustice *positively requires* discriminated classes and groups.

And the plutocracy hasn't been exclusively WASP for a very long time, if it ever was (and it never was). Richest man in the world is currently a (Lebanese)-Latino, for example.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
80. There again
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:04 PM
Apr 2012
I'd argue that so long as the problem of economic justice isn't addressed or solved, no individual

gains will stick. Because economic injustice *positively requires* discriminated classes and groups.

And the plutocracy hasn't been exclusively WASP for a very long time, if it ever was (and it never was). Richest man in the world is currently a (Lebanese)-Latino, for example.

...telling people that all other oppression is irrelevant as long as there is no "economic justice." Really?

So when the minimum wage is raised to $20 per hour that means that blacks and women will suddenly get equal pay and gays will be allowed to marry?

Also, what's the point of this: "Richest man in the world is currently a (Lebanese)-Latino, for example"

Does that mean that anti-immigration sentiments are on the way out?

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
82. Where do I say that all other oppression is irrelevant? Where do I say that economic justice
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:08 PM
Apr 2012

is about a rise in the minimum wage? Where do I say or imply that because the plutocracy includes people of color, anti-immigration sentiments are on the way out?

I wish you'd give up your private language and make the effort to actually pay attention to the common language.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
85. Oh, my bad
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:15 PM
Apr 2012

"Where do I say that all other oppression is irrelevant?"

You said: "I'd argue that so long as the problem of economic justice isn't addressed or solved, no individual gains will stick."

In response to this comment: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=522601

So I assume that you're not saying that the issues pointed out there are not secondary to solving "the problem of economic justice"?

There is a certain circular logic and obfuscation to your argument.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
90. It's the
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:35 PM
Apr 2012

"Funny how we're fighting the battle of birth control again, eh? Why do you think that is?"

...last gasp of white men.

wickerwoman

(5,662 posts)
94. And economic justice won't be addressed or solved
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:44 PM
Apr 2012

by asking (for some reason always other) people to give up their needs and interests in order to form a "unified" front.

Riddle me this: what are straight white Christian men going to be giving up in order to join this crusade against the 1%? Let's say I start biting my tongue at women being called "bitches", condescending anti-abortion legislation, unequal pay, prayer in schools, pharmacists' "right" to deny contraception, atheists being described as "un-American" or not "patriotic", gay rights, stem cell research, right to die, funding for science and the arts, hate crime legislation, etc. How exactly is the other side "meeting me half-way"? And how do I get any of those things back once we've toppled the oligarchy and replaced it with the new majority (mostly white straight Christian middle class people instead of white straight Christian rich people)?

Instead of "unity" what about coalition? It's kind of in my interests to unite and kind of in my interests not to. What is the group prepared to offer/concede to non-straight white Christian men in order to secure their support? Because I honestly haven't heard any offers.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
97. No one has asked anyone to give up their interests and needs. No one has ruled out "coalition"
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:07 PM
Apr 2012

as opposed to "unity," whatever you might mean by that.

I personally am mainly interested in a more nuanced discussion of privilege.

wickerwoman

(5,662 posts)
181. Are we reading the same website?
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 02:05 PM
Apr 2012

Because as far as I can see, every single time marriage equality is brought up there are posters that say "not now... there are more important things to do... why can't we just unite around health care or the surge in Afghanistan or beating the next Republican, etc". And the same arguments are made (often by the same people) about women's health care, racism and religion.
In the 1960s women were told that the only place they had in left at the time was on their backs. That's where second wave feminism came from.
You want nuance but you are setting up good guys (the 99%) and bad guys (the 1%) and ignoring the ways in which the good guys are genuinely sometimes also the bad guys.
And yes, I do take your point that the 1% uses divide and conquer but it works for a reason. You have poor, ignorant people who can only feel better about themselves by finding another group to kick even lower down the social ladder. But you don't address that by going to the group being kicked down and saying "why don't you just unite with the poor, ignorant people attacking you so we can go after the big fish". You deal with the poor, ignorant people and get them to concede that maybe they need to stop attacking people even poorer than them and start looking out for their own interests.
By coalition I mean a group that has fairly negotiated terms of cooperation in which everyone is there because they choose to be there and because they are getting something out of it. Everyone contributes and makes sacrifices to join.
I would contrast this with "unity" in which one group says "shut up, stop bickering over your petty issues and follow me!"
Telling someone to ignore and give up on genuine pain and historical wrong and to stop asking for deserved redress *is* asking them to give up their interests and needs. If we're going to do that, we need to spread it around and it needs to be voluntary and negotiated.
You don't get people to follow you and cooperate by starting off with "what you care about doesn't really matter as much as what I care about, so get over it and focus on the big picture".

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
157. Granted, it's going to take a lot of education and waking people up.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 03:43 AM
Apr 2012

I'll go with two of the bigger examples here for bandwidth's sake.

Straight white Christian men have been told by their puppet masters that gays are THE ENEMY. The second letter of Paul to the Romans (Romans 2, or 2 Romans 1:1 and onwards) in the Bible says, in a nutshell, judge them not lest you yourself be judged. But the Plutocrat puppet masters completely corrupted the word as Christians see it, and now we've got a war against gays. One big distraction away from the economic warfare being waged against both sides.

As for calling women the B-word? The PLUTOCRACY puts the money behind all the big media names that propagate calling women the B-word. They get air time, they get records sold, you can't say FUCK on television without getting bleeped but you can say the B-word without getting bleeped. Someone eventually has to wake up and axe that "bleep one but don't bleep the other" policy - but if they do, they get fired. Or laughed at. That's not just because of the Good Old Boys - that's the PLUTOCRACY and the Plutocrat-controlled media working to keep us divided. You don't get the media drinking that sexist hypocrite kool-aid unless you have some serious power over the whole industry.

Finally, yes, we need a coalition. The point of this thread is to ask how we can build that coalition. So far it appears to me that education is the key. Now how do we educate people?

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
158. Your point is well-founded.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 03:53 AM
Apr 2012

We cannot accept the false dichotomy of fighting for economic justice OR fighting for, say, women's rights.

It's going to take Christians letting Atheists do their thing and vice-versa, as well as men looking at women and saying "forget gender I'll just hire whoever is the most qualified". Tribalism is what you're referring to, and tribalism is rampant, like a stage 4 cancer. The only solution is for the warring tribes to stand down.

When one tribe's rights are perceived to trample on another's, things get hopelessly complicated, I totally recognize that. Still, we have to find a way, or it will cease to matter. It's alarmingly similar to the Prisoner's Dilemma: if all the tribes cooperate we stand to win the most. The difference between this and the Prisoner's Dilemma is if we all refuse to cooperate then we will all get stomped.

Stomped? How? Well, the Plutocracy has already pegged 2030 as the time they're going to flush us all down the toilet.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/next-great-depression-mit-researchers-predict-global-economic-190352944.html

Read between the lines: that's called a mass purge.

If that prediction turns out to be true what use will our conflicts be then? This is real. Cooperate or get purged.

eridani

(51,907 posts)
75. Yes, they are. But not because they are white or because they are male
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:47 PM
Apr 2012

It's a class thing in the end. But the working class still remains divided by other kinds of privilege.

 

Obamacare

(277 posts)
78. I don't see white gays, white atheist, white whatever
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 06:55 PM
Apr 2012

being murdered for looking suspicious or pulled over and beaten to death by the very people (cops)that are supposed to protect them. Sorry, there are just some groups, that are more discriminated than others. And if you can't admit that, because your race is part of the oppressors, then Houston we have a serious problem. If you can't identify the enemy or oppressor because he/she looks like you, then you are part of the problem, not the solution.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
92. I suspect
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:39 PM
Apr 2012

that if someone points out that there is racial profiling and that blacks are a disproportional percentage of the prison population, you'd post a picture of a white male being pulled over by the police and one behind bars.

See, there is no racism.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
95. The poster didn't say that there is racial profiling and that blacks are a disproportionate %
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:56 PM
Apr 2012

of prisoners, both of which I agree with.

This is what the poster said:

"I don't see white gays, white atheist, white whatever being murdered for looking suspicious or pulled over and beaten to death by the very people (cops)that are supposed to protect them."

But in fact, those things *do* happen.

Please stop putting words in my mouth and making false attributions of my motives. It's quite tiresome.

And please note that I'm asking you politely despite your consistently unpleasant responses to my posts.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
100. You're
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:16 PM
Apr 2012

"The poster didn't say that there is racial profiling and that blacks are a disproportionate % of prisoners, both of which I agree with."

...smart, right? What's the difference between what you implied and this (hint provided)

"I suspect that if someone points out that there is racial profiling and that blacks are a disproportional percentage of the prison population, you'd post a picture of a white male being pulled over by the police and one behind bars. "


joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
144. How more explicit can I frame "true colors"?
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 10:35 PM
Apr 2012

You wish you have my personal opinion as to what those colors might be? Well, I think it should be obvious to anyone who saw that response.

I think you're diminishing societal racism by posting a few grainy videos to "counter balance" the fact that minorities are disproportionately affected by societal racism and other social class systems. Obamacare was not making a literal statement (though it's possible they may have personally not seen it, it's unlikely), they were generalizing about groups.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
146. The poster said:
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 12:02 AM
Apr 2012

"I don't see white gays, white atheist, white whatever being murdered for looking suspicious or pulled over and beaten to death by the very people (cops)that are supposed to protect them."


He didn't say:

"Minorities are disproportionately more likely to be pulled over by cops and beaten, etc."


You're claiming he meant the second statement, thus I'm a racist.

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
148. The poster implied that, absolutely.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 12:05 AM
Apr 2012

If I am wrong they can correct me but I am pretty sure I'm not. I know what people mean when they generalize like that. I mean, you're taking them literally. As if they've never seen TV before in their life, as if they've lived under a rock or something.

They were by no means speaking literally.

 

HiPointDem

(20,729 posts)
149. Unlike yourself, I don't make broad assumptions about what people "mean" from one statement.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 12:12 AM
Apr 2012

And I don't make broad assumptions about what other people should *think* other people mean based on what *I* think they mean.

The poster *said* he doesn't see whites, gays, women being beaten and killed by cops.

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
187. It's basic linguistics, you interpret the meaning of what is said. Literalism...
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 06:25 PM
Apr 2012

...is very rarely used in colloquial language.

I didn't make a broad assumption, I made an interpretative observation.

I'm unconvinced my interpretation is incorrect.

loyalsister

(13,390 posts)
98. Absolutely right
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:07 PM
Apr 2012

I don't see what is so painful about acknowledging privilege. As a white woman with a disability I am aware of the fact that people are more inclined to listen to me than they are my black peers.

I noticed that it exists among homeless people in my community, as well. I see them and talk to them, and I know that they share with each other. The white men- anyway. The black homeless people are on their own. If they are seen together they are perceived as more threatening than a group of white guys who get together and share what they been able to gather with each other.

To deny that this is part of a larger cultural reality is naive at best. No one wants an admission of guilt. It's a matter of looking at reality and caring enough to challenge it, even if it means challenging the legitimacy of one's own advantages.

tjwash

(8,219 posts)
93. Love how the flaming amongst each other in this thread proves the exact point of your post.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 07:44 PM
Apr 2012

That's why the ruling class uses the tactic...it has worked perfectly well since before the ancient Egyptians.

uponit7771

(93,505 posts)
104. Pointing out disparities is NOT us being together. There are some progressive that don't think
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:42 PM
Apr 2012

...the disparities exist...hard to convince these people to fight said disparities if they don't think they exist OR...OR they aren't a benefactor of said disparities

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
140. +1, "hard to convince these people to fight said disparities if they don't think they exist"
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 10:19 PM
Apr 2012

If you don't recognize they exist or do not actually make efforts to fix them (even if you want to diminish the disparities due to your own insecurities) then I simply do not consider you progressive! Full fucking stop!

And believe me, I grew up in a deeply religious fundie household. I know, I know intimately and familiarly the biases and bullshit that goes on. It took me a long time to get over the "I'm white and I have privileges" 'accusation' because it made me feel bad and I thought "Oh I'm better than that! I'm not like that!" I grew up poor and I thought it was bullshit. But were I to have it as bad as some people I've seen. "There but for the grace of providence, go I" is one thing I seriously see every single day. Every day.

We must fight these disparities.

 

bart95

(488 posts)
107. and it forces people to compete to 'out-victim' each other
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 08:58 PM
Apr 2012

and you quit thinking like a winner the moment you do, even if you really are a victim

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
113. Yes,
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:18 PM
Apr 2012
and it forces people to compete to 'out-victim' each other

and you quit thinking like a winner the moment you do, even if you really are a victim


...that point was made here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=521958

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=522460

The OP is exactly the type of argument that employs this tactic.

 

bart95

(488 posts)
115. no, I think the OP is born out of exasperation of the endless blame
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:21 PM
Apr 2012

for things he has nothing to do with

nobody likes false accusations, white males included

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
117. So
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:37 PM
Apr 2012
no, I think the OP is born out of exasperation of the endless blame

for things he has nothing to do with

nobody likes false accusations, white males included

...you admit this is an attempt to invalidate the notion that white men are the oppressors?

That's exactly the point at the links, and exactly the kind of tatic used to divide.





 

bart95

(488 posts)
119. that post would be considered racist
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:42 PM
Apr 2012

if used against any other group

'...you admit this is an attempt to invalidate the notion that white men are the oppressors? '

...you admit this is an attempt to invalidate the notion that (insert group here) are the (bad thing)?

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
120. Don't
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:44 PM
Apr 2012
that post would be considered racist

if used against any other group

'...you admit this is an attempt to invalidate the notion that white men are the oppressors? '

...you admit this is an attempt to invalidate the notion that (insert group here) are the (bad thing)?


...be absurd!

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
123. Suggestion
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:49 PM
Apr 2012

"what's absurd about it? being called out?"

...go ahead and fill in the blank:

that post would be considered racist

if used against any other group

'...you admit this is an attempt to invalidate the notion that white men are the oppressors? '

...you admit this is an attempt to invalidate the notion that (insert group here) are the (bad thing)?


Show me how "racist" it would be.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
125. Actually,
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:52 PM
Apr 2012

"why? I already made my point it stands as it is"

...you made no valid "point." You made an utterly absurd claim.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
131. Here
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:58 PM
Apr 2012

let me help you:


that post would be considered racist

if used against any other group

'...you admit this is an attempt to invalidate the notion that white men are the oppressors? '

...you admit this is an attempt to invalidate the notion that (insert group here) are the (bad thing)?


you admit this is an attempt to invalidate the notion that (blacks) are the (oppressors)?

you admit this is an attempt to invalidate the notion that (blacks) are the (ones likely to be profiled)?

Racists?

Don't be ridiculous.

 

bart95

(488 posts)
132. you interpreted the (bad thing) differently than I intended
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 10:01 PM
Apr 2012

i meant bad thing they are guilty for

(this was an hour neither of us will ever get back)

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
134. Well
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 10:04 PM
Apr 2012
you interpreted the (bad thing) differently than I intended

i meant bad thing they are guilty for

(this was an hour neither of us will ever get back)


...gee, your theory failed. Please provide appropriate examples relevant to the point I made.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
151. And I'm not even a white male. Surprise.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 02:59 AM
Apr 2012

But I know white males are FAVORED by the Plutocracy, because the Plutocracy must pick a favorite and an underdog. If the oppression was equal we would all realize together that we're being screwed.

The "white man dominates" game is a distraction from the bigger picture. White men need to stop accepting this Faustian gift, blacks and Hispanics need to look at who is giving white men the privileges. Look PAST the white man to the Plutocracy and deal with them.

TRIBALISM is the word here and it benefits the Plutocracy, not the tribe that is selected to dominate.

 

bart95

(488 posts)
166. all i really know
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 07:28 AM
Apr 2012

is that i once belonged in this party, and now i'm starting to really doubt it, even if i have no idea where to go from here (I certainly dont belong in the other one either)

that after a decade of being totaly screwed out of my occupation i worked so hard for (tech), that i owe my party some kind of apology for what i was born as (and electing the first african american, which was supposed to get us past that, has only intensified it), Sure, I can apologise, but that will only lead to a demand for another. And another. And another. So what if it's a scheme that is really coming from the top 1 percent, that doesnt make it any less annoying - and that i no longer believe being a part of this is any kind of rational activity. I dont think it's right or that it serves any positive purpose

time for the frog to wise up and jump out of the pot

 

Obamacare

(277 posts)
182. How is electing the first African American President
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 02:19 PM
Apr 2012

supposed to get America past racism? One man can't end someone's ideology, nor should such a burden be placed on him to do so. Racism, hasn't intensified under Obama, it has merely been exposed. The grass is cut and the snakes are slithering!

 

bart95

(488 posts)
185. that's how it was sold
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 03:19 PM
Apr 2012

now, your telling us that it only 'exposed' racism


A New, 'Post-Racial' Political Era in America
by Daniel Schorr
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=18489466
January 28, 2008

January 28, 2008 NPR Senior News Analyst Daniel Schorr observes the ascendance of Barack Obama as a presidential candidate and wonders whether the U.S. is entering a new, "post-racial" political era.
Copyright © 2008 National Public Radio®. For personal, noncommercial use only. See Terms of Use. For other uses, prior permission required.

ROBERT SIEGEL, host:

Senator Barack Obama received several high-profile endorsements today including one from a Nobel Laureate, writer Toni Morrison. It was Morrison who famously dubbed Bill Clinton America's first black president.

In a letter to Obama, she wrote this: In addition to keen intelligence, integrity and a rare authenticity, you exhibit something that has nothing to do with age, experience, race or gender. And something I don't see in other candidates. That something is a creative imagination, which coupled with brilliance equals wisdom.

Well, Senior New Analyst Daniel Schorr agrees with Morrison in part. He says Senator Obama's appeal seems to transcend race.

DANIEL SCHORR: Welcome to the latest buzz word in the political lexicon, post-racial. It is what Senator Barack Obama signals in his victory speech in South Carolina when he tells of the woman who used to work for segregationist Strom Thurmond and now, knocks on doors for the Obama campaign.

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
139. You should acknowledge why it's happening, though.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 10:15 PM
Apr 2012

There is an undertone to the OP about various degrees of inequality causing a divide and that if somehow magically we fixed it everything would be OK. That's precisely the authoritarian mindset. It's not that white people are privileged, it's that we just can't all get along! Duh!

The reality of the matter is that white people use their privilege without even knowing it, without even thinking about it, it doesn't even occur to them that they are privileged because some guy got laid off three times.

How the fuck could anyone "get along" if the very people who have the most privilege on the planet don't recognize it and exploit it to their own ends, because, why not? Leftists have realized a long time ago that to solve the problem the rest of society needs a safety net to protect them from the plague that is the parasite of the European descended developed world war mongering person.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
133. It's simple really.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 10:02 PM
Apr 2012

You get a bunch of people claiming to argue from the left, I mean, hard left, and they subtlely introduce these right-leaning arguments that amount to: It's your fault...no, make that it's our fault!

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
135. Exactly.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 10:06 PM
Apr 2012

And it's not "hard left." The "hard left" recognizes development, the "hard left" recognizes inequality.

It's the authoritarian left who are revealing themselves here. Throw in some lofty language about class and pow, you can get away with overt racial insensitivities.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
145. Nailed it
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 10:41 PM
Apr 2012

"Throw in some lofty language about class and pow, you can get away with overt racial insensitivities."

This is the exact argument up thread:

"Battle and cripple the 1% and the other issues will resolve themselves."

Yeah, marriage equality can wait until then.

Raise the minimum wage and blacks and women will no longer experience pay disparity.

The argument is absurd.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
164. What do you think about what President Obama said?
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 06:32 AM
Apr 2012
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/18/obama-race-speech-read-th_n_92077.html

A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families - a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods - parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement - all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.


In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience - as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
168. You know
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 07:55 AM
Apr 2012

"What do you think about what President Obama said?"

...everyone knows about the "resentment builds over time." That has nothing to do with the point being argued.

...resentment is not racism, and again you're trivializing issues of discrimination.

"Battle and cripple the 1% and the other issues will resolve themselves."

Again, marriage equality shouldn't have to wait until everyone is financially secure, if that ever happens.

Blacks and women shouldn't have to wait until racism or resentment disappears to achieve economic parity.

People's rights shouldn't take a back seat to anyone's financial well being.

The argument is absurd.

Frankly, it's disgusting.



 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
172. Your argument is illogical
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:34 AM
Apr 2012

it is akin to saying let's spray the termites without going after the queen.

Nobody's saying that marriage equality has to wait, or any of those other straw men you attacked.

We need to push the message that gays aren't going to hurt anyone by getting married, and that the real threat to the family is the economy. That has nothing to do with your panicked argument that we should ignore gay marriage. Nothing at all.

President Obama was right.

ProSense

(116,464 posts)
174. Nonsense
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 08:54 AM
Apr 2012
Your argument is illogical

it is akin to saying let's spray the termites without going after the queen.

Nobody's saying that marriage equality has to wait, or any of those other straw men you attacked.

We need to push the message that gays aren't going to hurt anyone by getting married, and that the real threat to the family is the economy. That has nothing to do with your panicked argument that we should ignore gay marriage. Nothing at all.

President Obama was right.

President Obama is not arguing what you're arguing, which is: "Battle and cripple the 1% and the other issues will resolve themselves."

You may not want to admit it, but that's the message. See: "let's spray the termites without going after the queen"

You rationalize the argument that economic equality shoud come first at every turn, and then deny that you're doing so.

Marriage equality isn't equivalent to "termites," and "economic justice" is the "queen."

Your last point has been made often, and it makes sense, but that is not what's driving anti-gay sentiments.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
200. No, that's NOT what I said
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 07:11 PM
Apr 2012

"You rationalize the argument that economic equality shoud come first at every turn, and then deny that you're doing so."

No, the point is to deal with racists, but don't broadbrush all white people as racists, or all men as privileged oppressors of women.

We should be identifying with the struggles of those who are not trying to oppress other people, and that constitutes MOST of America nowadays. Obama most CERTAINLY did imply this and so am I.

SwampG8r

(10,287 posts)
191. these are all things that are routinely
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 11:34 PM
Apr 2012

tossed under bus when policy decisions against them are made
the irony here is so rich as to be mineable

Number23

(24,544 posts)
152. Yes, it was the 1% that burned crosses in people's yards
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 03:02 AM
Apr 2012

And rounded up black children in the middle of the night for slaughter. And hung black men from trees and treated black women like concubines.

Yes, it was the 1% and them only that confined black people to a life of poverty because of the color of our skin.

I'm not bothering with this idiocy anymore. You want to run around screaming "it's not race, it's class" for the rest of your life and sounding like an idiot, be my guest.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
156. When you can prove it was the elite that inflicted Hell on black people's lives
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 03:34 AM
Apr 2012

And THEM ALONE, then I will concede my "ignorance."

Since we both you know that you will be INCAPABLE of doing so (poor whites were all too happy to cause pain on blacks along with the rich white) you'll have to try a bit harder with the insults.

My "ignorance" stems from a profound understanding of this country's history, not a white washed (pun intended) version that acts as though American history didn't begin until 1978.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
159. That's easy.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 04:07 AM
Apr 2012

Rich whites, the Plutocrats, made up almost the ENTIRETY of slave owners in the South. Look it up. Not many whites, by percentage, owned slaves. Just the richest ones. LOOK IT UP.

All the other white males were sold the life of a slaveowner as a path to prosperity and the good life; so many of them, particularly in the South, drank the kool-aid and got indoctrinated. We're still dealing with the effects of that brain-washing. That's what started poor whites into hating on blacks. Nobody's saying they shouldn't be dealt with, as many cannot be de-programmed. But many whites who did nothing to anyone are also under attack - and this cannot go on.

This is not the only example of this happening. Look at the Caste system in India. Same problem, in a nutshell.

BTW my ethnicity is "none of the above" - I ain't white, WASP, German, Irish, Russian, etc., what the fuck ever brand of term they use now, and I have dealt with racial profiling and the skinheads too.

I've been discriminated against in the workplace and I know that when this is all sorted out, tons of white men and every other "privileged group" will be flushed out.

You know what really makes me sad? Many whites (not all) are happy to bask in the Faustian privilege given to them by the Plutocrats, they have no idea that the big economic flush is coming and they're going to be on the wrong side of it. Then when the flush happens and poor blacks see white unemployment skyrocket (and it will), they'll say "serves you right you bastards" instead of "damn, huddle up with us and we'll wage a revolution together against the Plutocracy". If they did offer the newly impoverished whites an olive branch, many whites won't take it - they'll blame the BLACKS for bringing them down. Or the Mexicans, etc.

Meanwhile, the Plutocrats will have won - instead of coalition and a united workers' revolution, we'll see an orgy of worker-on-worker revenge, Schadenfreude and counter-vendettas. It'll be like the Hunger Games, except instead of the Plutocrats forcing us to fight, we'll gladly fight amongst ourselves all on our own.

And whichever race Spartacus is, when he rises up, the other race will shoot him in the back and take us right back to hating each other, while we live in squalor under the shadow of the Plutocracy.

BUT... that doesn't matter to you.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
188. So the only people that perpetuated atrocities during the time of slavery
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 10:27 PM
Apr 2012

were RICH whites because they were the ones who owned slaves? Poor whites were never hired as overseers? Law enforcement (typically people who are far from wealthy) never violated the rights of AMERICAN CITIZENS purely because of the color of their skin?

The Ku Klux Klan was composed entirely of rich white folks??! Well blow me down! Whites in the community didn't deny services etc. to blacks and go out of their way to remind blacks of "their place" at every available opportunity? So poor whites were hanging out with black folks at every available opportunity, giving them jobs, helping them educate their children, and welcoming them into their neighborhoods?

What planet do you guys live on that come up with this crap? The ignorance is astounding but not surprising in any way. After that mindblowingly ignorant opening sentence, I didn't even read the rest of your post but I see you threw in a reference to The Hunger Games for some reason. I'm beginning to understand where you've gotten most of your education and why it appears a bit lacking.

SwampG8r

(10,287 posts)
192. i usually am in light disagreement with you
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 11:41 PM
Apr 2012

the last few days...not so much
maybe its an age thing but i remember the signs and the water fountains and the waiting rooms and the seating rules and ....man i could go on and on
i think the lack of an overt institutionally racist culture has fogged memories (key word overtly)
i can say this if you have seen it you cant unsee it
people look at the old photos and say "well we are so much better than them" but all they did was take the signs down

Number23

(24,544 posts)
194. "i can say this if you have seen it you cant unsee it"
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 04:56 PM
Apr 2012

Exactly. And I would add, if you have LIVED it (including through the tears and agony of your family members) you cannot UNLIVE it either. Not and be at peace with yourself, anyway.

SwampG8r

(10,287 posts)
220. i came back by here
Wed Apr 11, 2012, 12:07 PM
Apr 2012

going through responses
a line in this leapt at me
i have not had what many would describe as an easy life nor the rest of my family
but i can find peace with myself
i dont know when i decided to be at peace but that was when it happened
happiness and peace are things we decide to give ourselves
and accept from ourselves

Number23

(24,544 posts)
196. So I can infer that this weak, pointless, insignificant little insult is you
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 05:23 PM
Apr 2012

finally acknowledging what the rest of us already know. That you do not have the faintest, foggiest clue what you are talking about and never did?

Thanks for finally doing that. You've only done yourself a huge favor.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
197. Wait, you can dish out the insults but you can't take it?
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 05:37 PM
Apr 2012

You insult my education but when you're served the same medicine you have to whine and cry about it? Really?

You have no grasp of history or facts. None whatsoever. No, really, your arguments are utterly laughable. You're doing all the work of the Plutocrats for them. Congratulations for helping their cause.

Oh and no, of course you didn't read the rest of my post. You couldn't even comprehend what you responded to.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
198. You have not had one single "argument" to dispute
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 06:25 PM
Apr 2012

Last edited Sat Apr 7, 2012, 08:41 PM - Edit history (1)

Your comments are non-sensical gibberish without one shred of factual or historical evidence to back it up.

Name ONE thing I've written that is incorrect. Is/was the Ku Klux Klan composed entirely of wealthy white folks? Did white people as a whole (not just rich ones) advance economically and culturally from slavery or not? Were poor whites helping black people while their rich counterparts made life difficult for them?

Edit: Totally appropriate and well-deserved insults removed.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
199. Your wild eyed rants and raves are not "arguments", hence there is no dispute.
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 07:01 PM
Apr 2012

2/3's? Not even close, unless you count you and 2 others posting dozens of times in here. You utterly fail mathematics.

White people as a whole did NOT benefit from slavery. A lot of whites couldn't get work because they were competing against slave labor. THAT is what drove the North to go to war over slavery - slave labor versus paid labor. And plenty of poor whites were helping blacks. They were called abolitionists. So along with flunking math, you utterly FAILED history 101.

Look, your puerile babblings are a waste of time to "argue" with. But since you feel the need to jump bad, I'm going to keep goading you into hammering yourself into the ground with more of your historical and math blunders.

Got any more childish rants to throw at me? You sure as hell have no facts.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
203. Oh God.
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 07:27 PM
Apr 2012
White people as a whole did NOT benefit from slavery.

This is a level of denial and ignorance I have NEVER come across.

And are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that the number of abolitionists came anywhere near representing the mainstream of white thought back in its day? Abolitionists were grossly outnumbered by average whites. They were considered TRAITORS and were hated! Many were killed. Your level of ignorance is ASTOUNDING.

Edit: Totally appropriate and well-deserved insults removed
 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
204. Yes, run away with your tail between your legs. And take your laughable arguments with you.
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 07:37 PM
Apr 2012

Now don't go and pop a brain cell. It's the last one you have left. Thank God you never attended a school - you would be owed a big fat refund. And your ability to turn on a computer is more of a detriment to humanity than a benefit.

As I said, and you denied, TONS of white people found slavery to be a barrier to their employment. They were competing against free labor. This was a huge motivation for the civil war. I know that because I read a history book - which you could not even do.

And here's another reason why you look like a giant fool when you post these dumb arguments: if abolitionist whites were not in the mainstream white America would not have fought a civil war over this issue.

Do you get it yet? Of course not. You're too busy screaming with caps as if you think that makes your brain dead talking points any more worth taking seriously.

Number23

(24,544 posts)
207. Holy Hell...
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 07:49 PM
Apr 2012
if abolitionist whites were not in the mainstream white America would not have fought a civil war over this issue.

Oh God, somehow you just keep making an even bigger fool out of yourself. The government had NOTHING to do with it, huh? Laws? Decrees and proclamations passed? It was just the good-heartedness of the average white person that lead to the Civil War?

I have shaken my head at the incredible ignorance and stupidity within your other posts. This one has me busting a gut laughing. Cya. Lord knows, I wouldn't want to be ya.
 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
211. LOL I thought you said I wasn't worth another millisecond of your time.
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 08:06 PM
Apr 2012

Yet here you are again. Guess you had to eat those words.

The Government had something to do with the civil war. But who made up the Government? Almost all white people. They went to war to stop slavery. The Government also stopped slavery in new states entering the Union. Who made up the Government back then? Mostly white people. So much for your screaming irrational argument.

"It was just the good-heartedness of the average white person that lead to the Civil War?"

Well let's see if you're intelligent enough to answer that. It was either the good heartedness of white people up North that goaded the South to try to secede, or it was selfishness. What would that selfishness be? Oh, I know... because whites up north stood to lose economically if slavery continued. Which totally blows your "whites as a whole benefited from slavery" argument right out of the water.

Oh don't you worry about coming back. You're too humiliated to do that. Maybe you can call for help from one of your imaginary 2/3'ers here to explain how a civil war could be fought when only a handful of whites opposed slavery. Maybe you can get your make-believe "2/3 majority" to explain how international slave trades were BANNED in 1807, and how the Republican Party gained power by its opposition to slavery, if there weren't a TON of white people who opposed slavery.

Yeah, any of you imaginary 2/3'ers out there want to help Number23 here explain his/her crackpot theory that there weren't a ton of whites involved in the abolitionist movement?

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
162. President Obama said it even better than I did. So go ahead and hate on him, too.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 04:45 AM
Apr 2012
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/18/obama-race-speech-read-th_n_92077.html

A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families - a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods - parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement - all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.


In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience - as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.

joshcryer

(62,536 posts)
126. Divide and conquer.
Thu Apr 5, 2012, 09:54 PM
Apr 2012

That's the point of authoritarianism. It happens with fascists, it happens with state communists and capitalists. They have to keep the people at each others throats.

Of course, there is a real and tangible class distinction and frankly if we aren't able to create a new system then we should attempt to practically fix what parts are broken to at least ease the suffering of the less fortunate or lucky.

H&M here on DU just underscores it, you got people who share probably 90% of opinion but they continually post hateful screeds about others here. It's ridiculous.

 

provis99

(13,062 posts)
147. this whole thread is a prime example of how the dividing works.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 12:04 AM
Apr 2012

maybe we deserve to be ruled by the 1%, if we are just going to whine and bleat how others in the 99% oppress us.

Mosaic

(1,451 posts)
167. Poor whites still act racist
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 07:32 AM
Apr 2012

They must stop doing that. We must have full equality. To God we are all equal, no color is His favorite. In fact Jesus was a neutral Mediterranean brown. We all must be neutral too, if we believe in God.

Waiting For Everyman

(9,385 posts)
180. K&R One of the most interesting threads
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 10:48 AM
Apr 2012

I have seen on here in a long time. You make a very good point, and quite a few of the posts are informative and thought-provoking. I couldn't reply to all that I wanted to, but I bookmarked it and do intend to read it again.

Three thoughts: 1) most of the people living in poverty in the US are white; 2) MLK Jr.'s actions had broad support, and that certainly made them more effective.

And 3) this is something I've learned first-hand recently from a completely unrelated issue. We as people seeking change, have to remember that when a problem is solved, advocates for solving that problem are then out of a job. Especially paid advocates, or those who receive notice or position from it will actually, suddenly and inexplicably, turn and advocate hard against a solution that presents itself, especially if it's a really effective problem-ending solution. They have a vested interest in the problem - in the problem continuing. I was rather shocked to see that but I guess it's human nature and that's the world we live in.

So in this context, if a lot of 99% uniting were to go on, a lot of splinter group advocates would be a lot less influential. That's just something to keep in mind to watch for in advancing toward a goal. We have to remember to ask, "would so-and-so lose something if we were to succeed on this". If the answer is yes, that doesn't mean that so-and-so is necessarily corrupted, but it does mean at the very least to keep an eye on what that person says or does for the cause because he/she will be in conflict over it.

* Points 1 and 2 do not mean in any way to take anything away from the plight of minorities. Their struggles are undeniable. But I think we can walk and chew gum at the same time, and it doesn't usually require giving up small group goals to also push for large group goals. It might take giving up a little bit of overt animosity from time to time toward some traditionally seen as privileged, but that's a small price to pay for the chance for much greater progress on all fronts.

bvar22

(39,909 posts)
184. Economic Justice IS the biggest Social Issue.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 02:28 PM
Apr 2012

When the Working Class & The Poor realize WE have more in common with each othere,
than we have in common with the 1% and their employees in Washington,
THEN we can have the "change" we deserve.

As long as the 1% can keep us divided,
the Status Quo will continue.


You will know them by their WORKS,
not by their excuses.
[font size=5 color=green]Solidarity99![/font][font size=2 color=green]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------[/center]



 

Zax2me

(2,515 posts)
190. WHITE MEN brush stroke responses here are very broad.
Fri Apr 6, 2012, 10:46 PM
Apr 2012

A little too broad.
When I read them, I substitute 'black men' or 'gay' or.....'poor Hispanic women' just to see how it reads.
Nasty.
The fact is when you break people into these demographic groups and create judgment rules that are not equal - you aren't.
The results are racist, bigoted opinions masked as revenge at worst, a stab at fairness at best.
Fairness isn't easily achieved but a good start is by judging people based on individual merits rather than color of skin, sex or sexual orientation.
The instant you don't, you are no different than someone blaming blacks for crime just because they saw someone of African descent arrested on the late news.
Keep it individual.
That broad brush is all over the place, outside the lines and inaccurate as hell.

 

Zalatix

(8,994 posts)
193. Indeed, MLK Jr. did not say
Sat Apr 7, 2012, 06:40 AM
Apr 2012

"will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character... well I'll make an exception for white folks".

But somehow some DUers take me as saying we should ignore racism while we deal with the Plutocracy... that's NOTHING like what I said.

You summed it up best - deal with the racists but don't broad brush a whole group. Use THAT energy to unite people against the power elite who oppresses us all.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Yes, white men are being ...