Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Why do all white males get judged for privilege?

Page 7 of 8 [ 116 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,241
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Jan 2018, 1:53 am

Wolfram87 wrote:
A principle is the foundation on which your stance should stand. They cannot be the same thing.


Example:

Principle: People shouldn't have violence done to them for what they say or think.

Observation: Richard Spencer was punched in the face for things he says and thinks.

Stance: regardless of what I think of Spencer and his views, my stance must be that this was fundamentally a bad thing. Because of the principle above.


You're entitled to you're opinion. Plus, I'm trying to win an argument, which means sometimes taking stances I normally wouldn't. :twisted:


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

27 Jan 2018, 9:37 am

Wolfram87 wrote:
A principle is the foundation on which your stance should stand. They cannot be the same thing.


Example:

Principle: People shouldn't have violence done to them for what they say or think.

Observation: Richard Spencer was punched in the face for things he says and thinks.

Stance: regardless of what I think of Spencer and his views, my stance must be that this was fundamentally a bad thing. Because of the principle above.


Precisely.

Kraichgauer wrote:
Plus, I'm trying to win an argument, which means sometimes taking stances I normally wouldn't.


Which is an admission that you aren't arguing from a principled position. If you're playing to "win", you should refrain from placing yourself in check.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,241
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Jan 2018, 3:04 pm

adifferentname wrote:
Wolfram87 wrote:
A principle is the foundation on which your stance should stand. They cannot be the same thing.


Example:

Principle: People shouldn't have violence done to them for what they say or think.

Observation: Richard Spencer was punched in the face for things he says and thinks.

Stance: regardless of what I think of Spencer and his views, my stance must be that this was fundamentally a bad thing. Because of the principle above.


Precisely.

Kraichgauer wrote:
Plus, I'm trying to win an argument, which means sometimes taking stances I normally wouldn't.


Which is an admission that you aren't arguing from a principled position. If you're playing to "win", you should refrain from placing yourself in check.


Or am I just being a smart a$$?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

27 Jan 2018, 3:26 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I can just as easily say that you're a racist using arguments equality and fairness for set upon whites to cover your a$$. Then again, too many conservatives and libertarians are.


By all means give it your best shot, Bill. However, as your claim would rely exclusively on false representations of my stated beliefs, my principles and my character, you'd be risking the wrath of any mod who happened to read your post.

You, on the other hand, have explicitly stated your support for the racist concept that is "white privilege". I would probably be justified in overtly stating that you are a racist, and yet I've refrained from doing so, instead pointing out the racism of your ideas.

Do you understand how one of these approaches is conducive to reasonable debate, whilst the other is designed to silence dissent and shut down discourse?


So, what's your argument against white privilege? That white people are being set upon? That non-whites are just underachieving whiners?
And just how am I a racist? By saying that my own people as a group (not individuals, mind you) have it better than other groups due to institutional and cultural racism?
Again, I can accuse you of being a racist for denying that other groups of people face discrimination that whites don't. Then there's the question: why do you feel this way?


You haven't given me any answers, just a whole lot of empty verbiage.
And I will reiterate - - people who call anti-racism racist are themselves racist.


That's just nonsense. People say it because so many 'anti-racists' utterly despise white people and say racism against whites doesn't exist. So a lot of the time it has nothing to do with being against racism it is just being against white people.

If you are going to throw this 'white privilege' myth around which i have already debunked. Then you will have to provide some good evidence. And Jesus Christ, don't say it is because more black people get shot.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,241
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Jan 2018, 3:44 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I can just as easily say that you're a racist using arguments equality and fairness for set upon whites to cover your a$$. Then again, too many conservatives and libertarians are.


By all means give it your best shot, Bill. However, as your claim would rely exclusively on false representations of my stated beliefs, my principles and my character, you'd be risking the wrath of any mod who happened to read your post.

You, on the other hand, have explicitly stated your support for the racist concept that is "white privilege". I would probably be justified in overtly stating that you are a racist, and yet I've refrained from doing so, instead pointing out the racism of your ideas.

Do you understand how one of these approaches is conducive to reasonable debate, whilst the other is designed to silence dissent and shut down discourse?


So, what's your argument against white privilege? That white people are being set upon? That non-whites are just underachieving whiners?
And just how am I a racist? By saying that my own people as a group (not individuals, mind you) have it better than other groups due to institutional and cultural racism?
Again, I can accuse you of being a racist for denying that other groups of people face discrimination that whites don't. Then there's the question: why do you feel this way?


You haven't given me any answers, just a whole lot of empty verbiage.
And I will reiterate - - people who call anti-racism racist are themselves racist.


That's just nonsense. People say it because so many 'anti-racists' utterly despise white people and say racism against whites doesn't exist. So a lot of the time it has nothing to do with being against racism it is just being against white people.

If you are going to throw this 'white privilege' myth around which i have already debunked. Then you will have to provide some good evidence. And Jesus Christ, don't say it is because more black people get shot.


I'm sorry, but that's just senseless. Anti-racism is just that - rejection of racism. To denounce anti-racism as anti-white racism is a tacit endorsement of white supremacy. Are you trying to tell me that the mostly white counter protesters at Charlottesville were self hating whites? Or that white racists - with their record of murders - are actually the good guys?


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

27 Jan 2018, 4:01 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
I'm sorry, but that's just senseless. Anti-racism is just that - rejection of racism. To denounce anti-racism as anti-white racism is a tacit endorsement of white supremacy.


"I believe get to define my stance as being representative of anything other than the principles I'm actually arguing for, whilst simultaneously defining your principles as proof of beliefs or stances that you demonstrably do not cleave to"

You aren't anti-racist, Bill. You support laws and rules which grant rights and privileges which discriminate by race.

Quote:
Are you trying to tell me that the mostly white counter protesters at Charlottesville were self hating whites?


Are you trying to place JohnPowell amongst their ranks, or do you accept that he is not obliged to speak in defence of any position or individual, least of all those he has not voiced support for?

Quote:
Or that white racists - with their record of murders - are actually the good guys?


More intellectual dishonesty. Your shambolic strawman army isn't fooling anyone, Bill.



JohnPowell
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Feb 2016
Age: 42
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,806
Location: Palestine

27 Jan 2018, 4:40 pm

Yeah. If you are going to respond to my post then please respond to my points. If not, then don't bother. I can't keep mothering you Bill.


_________________
"No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?"


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,241
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Jan 2018, 10:19 pm

JohnPowell wrote:
Yeah. If you are going to respond to my post then please respond to my points. If not, then don't bother. I can't keep mothering you Bill.


I was responding, while making some of my own points.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,241
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

27 Jan 2018, 10:22 pm

adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
I'm sorry, but that's just senseless. Anti-racism is just that - rejection of racism. To denounce anti-racism as anti-white racism is a tacit endorsement of white supremacy.


"I believe get to define my stance as being representative of anything other than the principles I'm actually arguing for, whilst simultaneously defining your principles as proof of beliefs or stances that you demonstrably do not cleave to"

You aren't anti-racist, Bill. You support laws and rules which grant rights and privileges which discriminate by race.

Quote:
Are you trying to tell me that the mostly white counter protesters at Charlottesville were self hating whites?


Are you trying to place JohnPowell amongst their ranks, or do you accept that he is not obliged to speak in defence of any position or individual, least of all those he has not voiced support for?

Quote:
Or that white racists - with their record of murders - are actually the good guys?


More intellectual dishonesty. Your shambolic strawman army isn't fooling anyone, Bill.


Powell's views are well known to everyone on WP. I'll leave it at that.
You do know you sound like you're taking the side of the white nationalists, don't you? That's especially the case as you've denied white racism has any impact on non-whites. Sure Trump did it, but it hardly helped his popularity.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


avlien
Hummingbird
Hummingbird

Joined: 22 Oct 2015
Age: 45
Posts: 21
Location: Asheville, NC USA

27 Jan 2018, 11:03 pm

Sorry I'm so late to the fray. The short answer is: because they have privilege by default, without having to earn any of it. You immediately qualify your question as relating to poor countries in Eastern Europe, but that is a completely different discussion since your titular query was "Why do all white males get judged for privilege?"

I have just been reading Weapons of Math Destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy & it devotes quite a lot of itself to explaining this. Put simply: The world is run, by & large, by white men. So it follows that the vast majority of bias in the Western hemisphere, whether conscious or unconscious, falls favorably toward white men.

If you would like to know more about unconscious bias, few have put more effort into documenting it as Google. Here's the presentation Google gives employees on how to spot unconscious bias at work (care of Business Insider).

As for conscious bias, one needs look no farther than any civil rights movement.

Of course, in other parts of the world (Asia, for example) where white men are not the cultural leaders, this will be different but it is difficult to find many major cultures that are anything other than patriarchal. Those that are have historically been either marginalized or persecuted into extinction, particularly by what is arguably the most prolific patriarchy of all time: Catholicism (see: heresy, inquisition, crusades, etc). The last major non-patriarchal culture I can think of were the Cathars (the etymological source of the word "catharsis") of southern Europe, who were systematically exterminated during the Albigensian Crusade.

Patriarchy has been asserted, & often forced, on cultures historically. Knowing this I can completely understand why many people resent white male privilege. Taking it a step farther, this privilege also extends specifically to neurotypicals, since it is fundamentally a form of discrimination & thereby implicitly ableist as well. Even if one is a white male, the full extent of "white male privilege" still isn't felt if one has a disability.

Knowing these things, can you see why people excluded from this privilege might resent it?



Daniel89
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 Oct 2017
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,592

28 Jan 2018, 12:47 am

avlien wrote:
Sorry I'm so late to the fray. The short answer is: because they have privilege by default, without having to earn any of it. You immediately qualify your question as relating to poor countries in Eastern Europe, but that is a completely different discussion since your titular query was "Why do all white males get judged for privilege?"

I have just been reading Weapons of Math Destruction: How big data increases inequality and threatens democracy & it devotes quite a lot of itself to explaining this. Put simply: The world is run, by & large, by white men. So it follows that the vast majority of bias in the Western hemisphere, whether conscious or unconscious, falls favorably toward white men.

If you would like to know more about unconscious bias, few have put more effort into documenting it as Google. Here's the presentation Google gives employees on how to spot unconscious bias at work (care of Business Insider).

As for conscious bias, one needs look no farther than any civil rights movement.

Of course, in other parts of the world (Asia, for example) where white men are not the cultural leaders, this will be different but it is difficult to find many major cultures that are anything other than patriarchal. Those that are have historically been either marginalized or persecuted into extinction, particularly by what is arguably the most prolific patriarchy of all time: Catholicism (see: heresy, inquisition, crusades, etc). The last major non-patriarchal culture I can think of were the Cathars (the etymological source of the word "catharsis") of southern Europe, who were systematically exterminated during the Albigensian Crusade.

Patriarchy has been asserted, & often forced, on cultures historically. Knowing this I can completely understand why many people resent white male privilege. Taking it a step farther, this privilege also extends specifically to neurotypicals, since it is fundamentally a form of discrimination & thereby implicitly ableist as well. Even if one is a white male, the full extent of "white male privilege" still isn't felt if one has a disability.

Knowing these things, can you see why people excluded from this privilege might resent it?


This is utter nonsense, did blacks somehow magically become privileged when Obama was the most powerful person in the world. Just because autonomous individuals happen to share the same skin tone and gender as me does not mean I have the same power or advantages as they do. Women are better treated by law and society in the western world.



LoveNotHate
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Oct 2013
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,195
Location: USA

28 Jan 2018, 2:18 am

"All" doesn't appear to make sense.

Go to a male homeless shelter, you'll see a row of white guys ("bums") lined up outside.

Seems ridiculous to argue that they have some inherent "unearned favorable bias".

People don't have favorable opinions of "bums".

Image


_________________
After a failure, the easiest thing to do is to blame someone else.


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

28 Jan 2018, 12:30 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Powell's views are well known to everyone on WP. I'll leave it at that.


Your prejudice is not justification for making fallacious claims of association. His views may be erroneous (or, indeed, he may be correct), but what's important are the thought processes and intentions which inform these views, or would you like to establish a principle of your own, just as DarthMetaKnight did, and abandon the Principle of Charity?

Quote:
You do know you sound like you're taking the side of the white nationalists, don't you?


By which you mean "You do have a decent understanding of my perspective and how I'm likely to misinterpret your arguments because it serves my purpose to try and paint you as morally unsound by association, don't you?".

You're repeatedly making the foolish mistake of assuming your unprincipled arguments are unassailable. They are far from such.

Quote:
That's especially the case as you've denied white racism has any impact on non-whites.


And Bill adds another strawman to his ever-growing, increasingly insubstantial army.

You have my entire posting history at your disposal. Provide, with full context, any or all quotes to support your claim. Failure to do so shall be considered an admission that you're either purposefully engaging in shallow bigotry or deliberately trolling.

Quote:
Sure Trump did it, but it hardly helped his popularity.


His popularity was sufficient to carry him all the way to the White House. But that's entirely irrelevant. Standing by your principles is not a popularity contest - far from it in fact. Perhaps your esteem is directly tied to how you believe other people perceive you. It would certainly explain the virtue signalling, the reliance on dogmatic stances rather than principles, the seeming desire to sniff out witches and the support and justifications for violence done on ideological grounds.



adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

28 Jan 2018, 12:41 pm

avlien wrote:
Sorry I'm so late to the fray. The short answer is: because they have privilege by default, without having to earn any of it. You immediately qualify your question as relating to poor countries in Eastern Europe, but that is a completely different discussion since your titular query was "Why do all white males get judged for privilege?"


Let's temporarily ignore the fact that the above is both sexist and racist in order to take part in a little thought experiment.

Without me telling you anything about myself, operate on the assumption that I have white skin.

Now tell me which substantive privileges I have which are granted to me solely because of my presumed skin colour. By substantive privileges, I mean de facto benefits which impact my life in a meaningful way, and which can be directly attributed to my skin colour.

Disclaimer: This is not intended to be a Kafkatrap. I therefore feel obliged to inform you that literally any presumption you make based on my assumed skin colour cannot possibly be anything other than racist.

Disclaimer #2: As the leading authority on the subject of me, my life and my experiences, my judgement of the legitimacy of any presumption/s you make shall be deemed final.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 49,241
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

28 Jan 2018, 1:29 pm

adifferentname wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Powell's views are well known to everyone on WP. I'll leave it at that.


Your prejudice is not justification for making fallacious claims of association. His views may be erroneous (or, indeed, he may be correct), but what's important are the thought processes and intentions which inform these views, or would you like to establish a principle of your own, just as DarthMetaKnight did, and abandon the Principle of Charity?

Quote:
You do know you sound like you're taking the side of the white nationalists, don't you?


By which you mean "You do have a decent understanding of my perspective and how I'm likely to misinterpret your arguments because it serves my purpose to try and paint you as morally unsound by association, don't you?".

You're repeatedly making the foolish mistake of assuming your unprincipled arguments are unassailable. They are far from such.

Quote:
That's especially the case as you've denied white racism has any impact on non-whites.


And Bill adds another strawman to his ever-growing, increasingly insubstantial army.

You have my entire posting history at your disposal. Provide, with full context, any or all quotes to support your claim. Failure to do so shall be considered an admission that you're either purposefully engaging in shallow bigotry or deliberately trolling.

Quote:
Sure Trump did it, but it hardly helped his popularity.


His popularity was sufficient to carry him all the way to the White House. But that's entirely irrelevant. Standing by your principles is not a popularity contest - far from it in fact. Perhaps your esteem is directly tied to how you believe other people perceive you. It would certainly explain the virtue signalling, the reliance on dogmatic stances rather than principles, the seeming desire to sniff out witches and the support and justifications for violence done on ideological grounds.


Talk about strawmen! This thread is not about my principles, but about white privilege. Talk to me when you get back to the subject.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


adifferentname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jan 2008
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,885

28 Jan 2018, 1:56 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Talk about strawmen!


I shall! Until such a time as you cease relying on them.

Were you perhaps confused by my re-framing of your subjective allegation of 'guilt by fabricated association' in a manner that deconstructed its pretence to objectivity?

Quote:
This thread is not about my principles, but about white privilege.


Any thread in which you elect to post an argument in is about your principles, as well as those of the other posters. Otherwise we may as well be standing in front of mirrors. Why are you still confused by this?

Quote:
Talk to me when you get back to the subject.


Nay. I shall continue to watch you dance until you find some principles upon which we can forge a constructive discourse.