Critical race theory in national curriculum promotes 'victim

Page 3 of 6 [ 84 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next

Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 730
Location: Tulsa, OK

07 May 2021, 1:44 pm

https://nypost.com/2021/05/06/what-crit ... ssion=true
Here’s an eye opening article on the subject



Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 730
Location: Tulsa, OK

07 May 2021, 2:23 pm

roronoa79 wrote:
Pretty sure MLK is rolling in his grave more at conservatives twisting his words against modern Civil Rights activists. You can already guess what Fox & Friends would have said back in the day if they were talking about MLK's activism. He got the same accusations Civil Rights activists receive today. "You just hate white people!" "You're inciting riots!" "You hate America!" "You're trying to divide us!" "You're trying to erase history!" "You're a radical who does not reflect the values of the Silent Majority!" Learn history. Think outside the conservative, state-approved, sunshine-and-rainbows version of US history you grew up with.
His calling for non-violence didn't keep him from being one of the most hated men in America at the time of his death. Whites of all political persuasions hated him until he was vindicated by history. Conservatives really started to like him when they realized they could weaponize his non-violence rhetoric to try to shut up civil rights activists any time their protests became anything except 100% peaceful and non-violent. MLK himself said that riots do not just happen for no reason and you should not condemn riots without taking a good hard look at the system that prompted those riots in the first place. But that version of MLK would make conservatives uncomfortable so go on pretending the conservative-friendly MLK was the real one.

Sure, Since BLM is such a non-violent organization! :D



roronoa79
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jan 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 777
Location: Indiana

07 May 2021, 2:30 pm

Mikah wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
If someone could present an unbiased description of what CRT is then I might be able to have an opinion about it.


I don't think anyone can offer an unbiased description. From what I can tell it's a hodgepodge of left wing anti-racist beliefs, some of which are incompatible.

- The stated goal, as ever, is an equal and just society where race has no bearing on your life.

Basically.
Quote:
- At the same time race is the single most important thing about you and is the source of everything negative in your life.

Race is a social construct that has had enormous influence on the lives of people of all races. Biological race is not real, but the idea that it is real has caused people to be treated differently. Social ideas of race influence how we develop as people and how we are treated.
Quote:
- Colour blindness is racist.

Colour-blindness tends to refer to the idea that you should not let race influence your opinion of someone. However, in reality, those who claim to be color-blind or race-blind rather ignore race as a social construct and thus do not take it into account when considering people's thoughts and actions. It seems to amount to closing one's eyes, plugging one's ears, and repeating "Racism is over. I don't like racism so my actions cannot be influenced by racism. Race doesn't exist so my thoughts and actions can't be influenced by ideas of race that have been drilled into me on an unconscious level by society."
Quote:
- Racist laws are bad.
- Unless they target whites.

Laws that are 'racist' against whites tend to mostly be laws which try to undo the advantages enjoyed by whites as a result of centuries of society being influenced by racist ideas which privileged whites at others' expense.
Quote:
- If there are no obviously racist laws, disparate outcomes between races must mean the problem is elsewhere in the "system".

Is that so far-fetched? Did we think racism was only a conscious phenomenon and that legal racism completely vanished after the 1960s?
Quote:
- But never rooted in biology.

Nope
Quote:
- Race is a social construct so it doesn't matter.
- Literally everything else that matters is a social construct.

CRT suggests that race is important because it is a social construct. See above.
Quote:
- Narrative > Evidence, Observation, Reason, Logic.

This tends to more apply to those on the right if you ask me.
Upholding the Narrative that the US is a special snowflake country which is 100% certified racism-free and was founded on FREEDOM and NOBODY before 1800 EVER thought there was ANYTHING wrong with slavery > Evidence, Observation, Reason, Logic.


_________________
Diagnoses: AS, Depression, General & Social Anxiety
I guess I just wasn't made for these times.
- Brian Wilson

Δυνατὰ δὲ οἱ προύχοντες πράσσουσι καὶ οἱ ἀσθενεῖς ξυγχωροῦσιν
Those in positions of power do what their power permits, while the weak have no choice but to accept it.

- Thucydides


funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,889
Location: I'm right here

07 May 2021, 2:38 pm

Mr Reynholm wrote:
https://nypost.com/2021/05/06/what-critical-race-theory-is-really-about/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Here’s an eye opening article on the subject


Eye-opening? He's just repackaging the 'cultural Marxism' conspiracy theory.


_________________
politics is dumb but very important
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 730
Location: Tulsa, OK

07 May 2021, 2:52 pm

roronoa79 wrote:
Mikah wrote:
naturalplastic wrote:
If someone could present an unbiased description of what CRT is then I might be able to have an opinion about it.


I don't think anyone can offer an unbiased description. From what I can tell it's a hodgepodge of left wing anti-racist beliefs, some of which are incompatible.

- The stated goal, as ever, is an equal and just society where race has no bearing on your life.

Basically.
Quote:
- At the same time race is the single most important thing about you and is the source of everything negative in your life.

Race is a social construct that has had enormous influence on the lives of people of all races. Biological race is not real, but the idea that it is real has caused people to be treated differently. Social ideas of race influence how we develop as people and how we are treated.
Quote:
- Colour blindness is racist.

Colour-blindness tends to refer to the idea that you should not let race influence your opinion of someone. However, in reality, those who claim to be color-blind or race-blind rather ignore race as a social construct and thus do not take it into account when considering people's thoughts and actions. It seems to amount to closing one's eyes, plugging one's ears, and repeating "Racism is over. I don't like racism so my actions cannot be influenced by racism. Race doesn't exist so my thoughts and actions can't be influenced by ideas of race that have been drilled into me on an unconscious level by society."
Quote:
- Racist laws are bad.
- Unless they target whites.

Laws that are 'racist' against whites tend to mostly be laws which try to undo the advantages enjoyed by whites as a result of centuries of society being influenced by racist ideas which privileged whites at others' expense.
Quote:
- If there are no obviously racist laws, disparate outcomes between races must mean the problem is elsewhere in the "system".

Is that so far-fetched? Did we think racism was only a conscious phenomenon and that legal racism completely vanished after the 1960s?
Quote:
- But never rooted in biology.

Nope
Quote:
- Race is a social construct so it doesn't matter.
- Literally everything else that matters is a social construct.

CRT suggests that race is important because it is a social construct. See above.
Quote:
- Narrative > Evidence, Observation, Reason, Logic.

This tends to more apply to those on the right if you ask me.
Upholding the Narrative that the US is a special snowflake country which is 100% certified racism-free and was founded on FREEDOM and NOBODY before 1800 EVER thought there was ANYTHING wrong with slavery > Evidence, Observation, Reason, Logic.

So this shows that CRT is essnetialy just full of doublespeak.



Mr Reynholm
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2019
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 730
Location: Tulsa, OK

07 May 2021, 2:53 pm

funeralxempire wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
https://nypost.com/2021/05/06/what-critical-race-theory-is-really-about/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Here’s an eye opening article on the subject


Eye-opening? He's just repackaging the 'cultural Marxism' conspiracy theory.

Because it is TRUE.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,889
Location: I'm right here

07 May 2021, 3:00 pm

Mr Reynholm wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
https://nypost.com/2021/05/06/what-critical-race-theory-is-really-about/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
Here’s an eye opening article on the subject


Eye-opening? He's just repackaging the 'cultural Marxism' conspiracy theory.

Because it is TRUE.


It's not even coherent.


_________________
politics is dumb but very important
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


roronoa79
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Jan 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 777
Location: Indiana

07 May 2021, 3:14 pm

Mr Reynholm wrote:
Sure, Since BLM is such a non-violent organization! :D

If we were having this conversation 60 years ago, this reply might have been:
Quote:
Sure, Since MLK has such non-violent supporters! :D

Because, as I said, the rhetoric used against modern Civil Rights activists is just recycled from the 60s. Except with the twisted words of MLK thrown in for maximum gaslighting.

Quote:
So this shows that CRT is essnetialy just full of doublespeak.

Could you be more specific.

Quote:
(some typically reactionary nonsense from the New York Post)

"Marxism! The bogeyman of Marxism wants to spread the blood of your children and destroy the just society capitalism has created! Civil Rights activists are all 100% Marxist, Maoist/Stalinist agents!! Panic! Panic, already gdi!!"
Yet another instance of rhetoric recycled from the Civil Rights era.


_________________
Diagnoses: AS, Depression, General & Social Anxiety
I guess I just wasn't made for these times.
- Brian Wilson

Δυνατὰ δὲ οἱ προύχοντες πράσσουσι καὶ οἱ ἀσθενεῖς ξυγχωροῦσιν
Those in positions of power do what their power permits, while the weak have no choice but to accept it.

- Thucydides


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,228
Location: Long Island, New York

07 May 2021, 4:29 pm

What critical race theory is really about
Christopher F. Rufo is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute

Quote:
Critical race theory is fast becoming America’s new institutional orthodoxy. Yet most Americans have never heard of it — and of those who have, many don’t understand it. This must change. We need to know what it is so we can know how to fight it.

To explain critical race theory, it helps to begin with a brief history of Marxism.

Originally, the Marxist left built its political program on the theory of class conflict. Karl Marx believed that the primary characteristic of industrial societies was the imbalance of power between capitalists and workers. The solution to that imbalance, according to Marx, was revolution: The workers would eventually gain consciousness of their plight, seize the means of production, overthrow the capitalist class and usher in a new socialist society.

During the 20th century, a number of regimes underwent Marxist-style revolutions, and each ended in disaster. Socialist governments in the Soviet Union, China, Cambodia, Cuba and elsewhere racked up a body count of nearly 100 million people. They are remembered for gulags, show trials, executions and mass starvations. In practice, Marx’s ideas unleashed man’s darkest brutalities.

By the mid-1960s, Marxist intellectuals in the West had begun to acknowledge these failures. They recoiled at revelations of Soviet atrocities and came to realize that workers’ revolutions would never occur in Western Europe or the United States, which had large middle classes and rapidly improving standards of living. Americans in particular had never developed a sense of class consciousness or class division. Most Americans believed in the American dream — the idea that they could transcend their origins through education, hard work and good citizens.

But rather than abandon their political project, Marxist scholars in the West simply adapted their revolutionary theory to the social and racial unrest of the 1960s. Abandoning Marx’s economic dialectic of capitalists and workers, they substituted race for class and sought to create a revolutionary coalition of the dispossessed based on racial and ethnic categories.

Fortunately, the early proponents of this revolutionary coalition in the US lost out in the 1960s to the civil rights movement, which sought instead the fulfillment of the American promise of freedom and equality under the law. Americans preferred the idea of improving their country to that of overthrowing it. Martin Luther King Jr.’s vision, President Lyndon Johnson’s pursuit of the Great Society, and the restoration of law and order promised by President Richard Nixon in his 1968 campaign defined the post-1960s American political consensus.

Critical race guru Ibram X. Kendi, who directs the Center for Antiracist Research at Boston University, has proposed the creation of a federal Department of Antiracism. This department would be independent of (i.e., unaccountable to) the elected branches of government and would have the power to nullify, veto or abolish any law at any level of government and curtail the speech of political leaders and others deemed insufficiently “antiracist.”

One practical result of the creation of such a department would be the overthrow of capitalism, since, according to Kendi, “in order to truly be antiracist, you also have to truly be anticapitalist.”

In other words, identity is the means; Marxism is the end.

An equity-based form of government would mean the end not only of private property but also of individual rights, equality under the law, federalism and freedom of speech. These would be replaced by race-based redistribution of wealth, group-based rights, active discrimination and omnipotent bureaucratic authority.

Historically, the accusation of “anti-Americanism” has been overused. But in this case, it’s not a matter of interpretation: Critical race theory prescribes a revolutionary program that would overturn the principles of the Declaration and destroy the remaining structure of the Constitution.

What does critical race theory look like in practice? Last year, I authored a series of reports focused on critical race theory in the federal government. The FBI was holding workshops on intersectionality theory. The Department of Homeland Security was telling white employees that they were committing “microinequities” and had been “socialized into oppressor roles.” The Treasury Department held a training session telling staff members that “virtually all white people contribute to racism” and that they must convert “everyone in the federal government” to the ideology of “antiracism.” And the Sandia National Laboratories, which design America’s nuclear arsenal, sent white male executives to a three-day re-education camp where they were told that “white male culture” was analogous to the “KKK,” “white supremacists” and “mass killings.” The executives were then forced to renounce their “white male privilege” and to write letters of apology to fictitious women and people of color.

This is a revolutionary change. When originally established, these government institutions were presented as neutral, technocratic and oriented toward broadly held perceptions of the public good. Today, under the increasing sway of critical race theory and related ideologies, they are being turned against the American people. This isn’t limited to the permanent bureaucracy in Washington, DC, but is true as well of institutions in the states — even red states. It is spreading to county public health departments, small Midwestern school districts and more. This ideology will not stop until it has devoured all of our institutions.

So far, attempts to halt the encroachment of critical race theory have been ineffective. There are a number of reasons for this.

First, too many Americans have developed an acute fear of speaking up about social and political issues, especially those involving race. According to a recent Gallup poll, 77 percent of conservatives are afraid to share their political beliefs publicly. Worried about getting mobbed on social media, fired from their jobs or worse, they remain quiet, largely ceding the public debate to those pushing these anti-American ideologies. Consequently, the institutions themselves become monocultures: dogmatic, suspicious, and hostile to a diversity of opinion.

Second, critical race theorists have constructed their argument like a mousetrap. Disagreement with their program becomes irrefutable evidence of a dissenter’s “white fragility,” “unconscious bias” or “internalized white supremacy.” I’ve seen this projection of false consciousness on their opponents play out dozens of times in my reporting.

Third, Americans across the political spectrum have failed to separate the premise of critical race theory from its conclusion. Its premise — that American history includes slavery and other injustices, and that we should examine and learn from that history — is undeniable. But its revolutionary conclusion — that America was founded on and defined by racism and that our founding principles, our Constitution and our way of life should be overthrown — does not rightly, much less necessarily, follow.

Fourth and finally, the writers and activists who have had the courage to speak out against critical race theory have tended to address it on the theoretical level, pointing out the theory’s logical contradictions and dishonest account of history.

These criticisms are worthy and good, but they move the debate into the academic realm — friendly terrain for proponents of critical race theory. They fail to force defenders of this revolutionary ideology to defend the practical consequences of their ideas in the realm of politics.

No longer simply an academic matter, critical race theory has become a tool of political power. To borrow a phrase from the Marxist theoretician Antonio Gramsci, it is fast achieving cultural hegemony in America’s public institutions. It is driving the vast machinery of the state and society. If we want to succeed in opposing it, we must address it politically at every level.

Critical race theorists must be confronted with and forced to speak to the facts. Do they support public schools separating first-graders into groups of “oppressors” and “oppressed”? Do they support mandatory curricula teaching that “all white people play a part in perpetuating systemic racism”? Do they support public schools instructing white parents to become “white traitors” and advocate for “white abolition”? Do they want those who work in government to be required to undergo this kind of re-education? How about managers and workers in corporate America? How about the men and women in our military?

How about every one of us?


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


Pepe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Jun 2013
Gender: Male
Posts: 15,186
Location: Australia

08 May 2021, 12:37 am

:thumright:


_________________
Laughter is the best medicine. Age-appropriate behaviour is an arbitrary NT social construct.
Don't tell me white lies. Gaslight me at your peril. Don't give me your bad attitude. Hypnosis, psychosis. Tomarto, tomayto. There are *4* lights. Honey badger.
If I'm so bad, pass me by. ;)


And one more thing,


"A stranger is a friend gang-stalker you haven't met yet." Humour is not meant to be taken seriously, yet many on the left pervert its intent.
Truth may be inconvenient but it is never politically incorrect...The Oracle of Truth has spoken...8)


I luv Joe Biden! Democracy first!


ASPartOfMe
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Aug 2013
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 25,228
Location: Long Island, New York

08 May 2021, 7:34 am

Just some quick remarks.

When I posted the article in the NY Post I just did it without realizing the last few posts were about that article. I am still glad I did because the previous posting of the Article was just the link to the article.

A lot has been made of the source being the NY Post a “conservative” tabloid. The Post is where it was printed, the source is Christopher Rufo a magna cum laude graduate of Georgetown University, a fellow at The Manhattan Institute. The source is an ideologue but credentaled.

Marxism, Marxism, Marxism.
Rufo posits that Critical Race Training uses “identity politics” as a means to a Marxist end. I disagree, I believe it is the opposite, the means is Marxian tactics the goal is to end “systematic racism”. Rufo notes that Kendi sees capitalism as the problem. Being anti capitalist does not automatically make one a Marxist. Psuedo Marxist of better yet heavily Marxist influenced is how I would describe it. To deny this influence and pretend this is just “anti racism” is gaslighting.

Same Old, Same Old
Speaking of gaslighting as pointed out sneaky “Communist Plot” has been used to deflect for a century now. I agree that critical race theory is the latest attempt by Trumpists to own the libs, after all the election was stolen was just the latest conspiracy theory that
backfired on them. If you say today in May 8th everyday you are going to be right once every 365/366 days.

Prediction
The Critical Race Theory/Woke revolution will be successful in the blue and purple states. They have come up with effective slogans in “Black Lives Matter” and “Anti Racism” that are easy to grasp and easy to accuse the person disagreeing of being a racist. The have critics in a catch 22 situation, ban teaching of the theory as some states are doing and you are engaging in the cancel culture you have been critising. In die hard Trump country all that won’t matter. Unless the criticism moves beyond the Trump world and a sprinkling of old white “out of touch” liberals the critiques won’t even be listened to, assumed to be the latest nonsense from Trumpists. Reich Wing cried wolf effect.


_________________
Professionally Identified and joined WP August 26, 2013
DSM 5: Autism Spectrum Disorder, DSM IV: Aspergers Moderate Severity.

“My autism is not a superpower. It also isn’t some kind of god-forsaken, endless fountain of suffering inflicted on my family. It’s just part of who I am as a person”. - Sara Luterman


vividgroovy
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

Joined: 20 Dec 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 85
Location: Santa Maria, CA

09 May 2021, 5:34 am

funeralxempire wrote:
Image


My issue with this cartoon is not that it points out systemic racism. The issue is who it places the blame on. In my view, the fault lies with the people in power depicted in the cartoon who allowed their racist views to cloud their judgement. But according to the cartoon, all of this falls on Bob, because he benefitted from stuff that mostly happened before he even existed. He was born into debt, like the idea of Original Sin, and the only way he can repay that debt is to confess his sin/"privilege" and then, presumably, devote his time, money and effort to a particular political ideology. It's manipulation.

I don't expect a cartoon to cover everything on the topic it's addressing, but here are a couple things I think could have been considered:

-- That Bob may not be in any sort of position of authority, as all of the racist people depicted in the cartoon are.
-- That if Bob is in a position of authority, he may not hold these racist views and may take exactly the sort of actions that the cartoonist would desire in situations like these.
-- That Bob's immigrant ancestors may have experienced some form of discrimination, even if it was not at the same level as the victimized groups depicted in the cartoon.

I also believe, however, that people on the opposite end of the political spectrum seize upon cartoons like this in an attempt to manipulate people into joining their side.



Mikah
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Oct 2015
Age: 33
Posts: 1,845
Location: England

09 May 2021, 7:30 am

roronoa79 wrote:
Quote:
- Narrative > Evidence, Observation, Reason, Logic.

This tends to more apply to those on the right if you ask me.


I wasn't having a go or channelling Ben Shapiro. It's a central belief of CRT according to most sources I have read. The Story of one's people or race trumps everything else.


_________________
As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of Man -
There are only four things certain since Social Progress began: -
That the Dog returns to his Vomit and the Sow returns to her Mire,
And the burnt Fool’s bandaged finger goes wabbling back to the Fire;

And that after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins
When all men are paid for existing and no man must pay for his sins,
As surely as Water will wet us, as surely as Fire will burn,
The Gods of the Copybook Headings with terror and slaughter return!


slam_thunderhide
Snowy Owl
Snowy Owl

User avatar

Joined: 5 Dec 2014
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 144

09 May 2021, 9:11 am

funeralxempire wrote:
Mr Reynholm wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Image

If you promote a doctrine of hereditary guilt you may have a point. However, as a society we don't do that because It leaves out any personal accountabity by the "perps" or "victims".


How exactly is pointing out that some people benefited from systemic racism while others suffered because of it promoting a doctrine of hereditary guilt?

Are people not allowed to speak the truth if it conflicts with your ideological preferences?


The implication behind this sort of cartoon is that something needs to be done in the present day United States to make up for the fact that the US as a country was originally, largely, built by white people for white people. The thing is, this sort of "white privilege" propaganda has no logical end-point. There is always going to be "more work" that needs to be done.

You know they are even pushing this white privilege stuff in places like Ireland? No doubt minorities in China would like to lecture the Chinese about their Chinese privilege if they thought they could get away with it.

So as far as I'm concerned, the louder I hear a person of color lecturing about white privilege, the more likely I am to assume that nothing that is done for them will ever be enough, although I cannot really blame them for trying it on. But far worse than these people are the white liberals. White liberals who drone on about white privilege should just do the decent thing and give away all their possessions to people of color instead of virtue-signaling and self-righteously lecturing everyone to the right of them.



funeralxempire
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Oct 2014
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,889
Location: I'm right here

09 May 2021, 4:51 pm

vividgroovy wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Image


My issue with this cartoon is not that it points out systemic racism. The issue is who it places the blame on. In my view, the fault lies with the people in power depicted in the cartoon who allowed their racist views to cloud their judgement. But according to the cartoon, all of this falls on Bob, because he benefitted from stuff that mostly happened before he even existed. He was born into debt, like the idea of Original Sin, and the only way he can repay that debt is to confess his sin/"privilege" and then, presumably, devote his time, money and effort to a particular political ideology. It's manipulation.

I don't expect a cartoon to cover everything on the topic it's addressing, but here are a couple things I think could have been considered:

-- That Bob may not be in any sort of position of authority, as all of the racist people depicted in the cartoon are.
-- That if Bob is in a position of authority, he may not hold these racist views and may take exactly the sort of actions that the cartoonist would desire in situations like these.
-- That Bob's immigrant ancestors may have experienced some form of discrimination, even if it was not at the same level as the victimized groups depicted in the cartoon.

I also believe, however, that people on the opposite end of the political spectrum seize upon cartoons like this in an attempt to manipulate people into joining their side.


No one's blaming Bob for the opportunities he's had, they're just drawing attention to the fact that not everyone receives those opportunities. Some people have additional struggles, some of those are related to demographic factors. Pointing this out isn't blaming anyone for it.


_________________
politics is dumb but very important
戦争ではなく戦争と戦う


vividgroovy
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

Joined: 20 Dec 2018
Gender: Male
Posts: 85
Location: Santa Maria, CA

10 May 2021, 4:40 am

funeralxempire wrote:
vividgroovy wrote:
funeralxempire wrote:
Image


My issue with this cartoon is not that it points out systemic racism. The issue is who it places the blame on. In my view, the fault lies with the people in power depicted in the cartoon who allowed their racist views to cloud their judgement. But according to the cartoon, all of this falls on Bob, because he benefitted from stuff that mostly happened before he even existed. He was born into debt, like the idea of Original Sin, and the only way he can repay that debt is to confess his sin/"privilege" and then, presumably, devote his time, money and effort to a particular political ideology. It's manipulation.

I don't expect a cartoon to cover everything on the topic it's addressing, but here are a couple things I think could have been considered:

-- That Bob may not be in any sort of position of authority, as all of the racist people depicted in the cartoon are.
-- That if Bob is in a position of authority, he may not hold these racist views and may take exactly the sort of actions that the cartoonist would desire in situations like these.
-- That Bob's immigrant ancestors may have experienced some form of discrimination, even if it was not at the same level as the victimized groups depicted in the cartoon.

I also believe, however, that people on the opposite end of the political spectrum seize upon cartoons like this in an attempt to manipulate people into joining their side.


No one's blaming Bob for the opportunities he's had, they're just drawing attention to the fact that not everyone receives those opportunities. Some people have additional struggles, some of those are related to demographic factors. Pointing this out isn't blaming anyone for it.


I'm glad you feel that way, but I've encountered people on the internet who I believe would condemn Bob for his privilege and especially for not confessing it. I've seen people condemn fictional characters from works that are intended as entertainment for their privilege. I can only image what they'd say about a character like Bob, who appears to exist solely to illustrate a point about privilege.

Here's a non-political metaphor for you. Like most metaphors, I'm sure it isn't a perfect comparison, but here goes anyway:

Imagine Sally gets a new job only to find out that the previous person who held the job, Jane, has died and that's the reason the position was vacant. Sally cannot say that she didn't benefit from Jane's death. If she were to say so, she'd look rather foolish and insensitive to her co-workers. However, imagine that someone came up to her and said, "Hey, you do realize that you benefitted from Jane's death by getting this job, don't you?" Wouldn't she feel that that was a bit accusatory? Why would the person say so, if they didn't want her to feel badly about it? [/metaphor]

I'm also reminded of an article one of my facebook friends shared, which said that anyone who votes third party is "privileged." Or in other words, anyone who feels safe and free enough to vote for who they actually want is getting away with something, and they need to correct it by voting for the person who wrote the article wants instead. And right here in this forum, in another thread, someone just referenced anyone who isn't involved in politics as "privileged." Because I've seen things like this frequently, my association with "privilege" and things that reference it, like this cartoon, is "attempt to guilt the person into voting for who you want them to."