Rebel flag, racist or not?

Post Reply New Topic

I will start with the disclaimer that I dislike white privilege as a descriptor. It arises from critical race theory, but its title serves to distance it from broader diversity. Women, LGBT and the poor are all deprived of similar privilege--but we don't call it "White, middle class, hetero male privilege."

That being said, you don't accept white privilege, white privilege is conferred by the society in which you live.

If your community is not described as being a bunch of freeloaders--that is white privilege.
If you are not subject to ostracism by your neighbors--that is white privilege.
If you are not mistrusted when you walk into a store--that is white privilege.
If you are not worried about physical violence when you walk alone at night--that is white privilege.
If the term, "one of them," doesn't refer to you--that is white privilege.

White privilege is the freedom from discrimination, harassment and violence that is enjoyed by the majority population. It is not asserted or accepted, it is the absence of mistreatment. It also bears noting that white privilege is not an absolute. In most respects, I am brimming over with white privilege. I am white and male. I am well educated, with a career and the material privileges and economic freedom that accompanies it. Only in my sexual orientation am I unprivileged. So my privilege (or my lack of it) is context specific.

One of the reasons that communities band together is that only when population reaches a critical mass can white privilege be overturned. The development of cities in North America particularly demonstrated this. As each new urban underclass emerged, it coalesced in its neighborhoods where people could feel safe and comfortable. That's white privilege in action--and it is no less visible today than it was in New York in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.

If I'm white and I am described this way, do I still have white privilege?

It's a load of rubbish. Some people are seen as better in certain circumstances than others.

Try being a male teacher or a male caregiver to children, for instance.

It depends why you are described that way. Are you lumped together with "lazy young layabouts," or, "fat wh***y living on the dole?" Then no--you no longer have white privilege in that context. And you demonstrate why I don't like the label. White privilege is not restricted to white people.

If you'll note, I said very clearly that white privilege is not absolute, and went on to point out that my privilege is context specific. So a male caregiver has put himself in a context in which the white privilege that he enjoys in daily life is eroded because he works in a female dominated environment in which he is subject to mistrust. Another classic example of how privilege is not absolute.

But if that man leaves his job for another, his privilege is restored.

No, it's not rubbish. James got it quite right. There is an ease with which one moves through the world - rather, an ease with which the world lets one move through it. The ease, by and large, is privilige.

That I'm male means I'm judged very differently than if I were female - life is a whole lot easier, and there are concerns that don't even cross my mind. This is both amusing and illustrative:

https://twitter.com/MalePrivilege

And the everyday sexism project is a great and sadly necessary idea:

http://www.everydaysexism.com/

What's more, I'm white, and straight. However, I am working class. I have had the experience of walking into distinctly non-working class environments, and it's never fun. I don't get on with people in general, but that's me - maybe my asperger's, maybe not. But I am very much a lot more ill at ease where some well-to-do sort tries to talk to me.

I grew up on a council estate, but knew some of the kids from the ajoining private estate. An early politically illuminative experience came when I was 11, and one such kid called me a prole. Until that point I had been blessedly unaware of how I might be seen - had assumed equality, as kids do. I found no disagreement with the idea that calling someone 'n****r' or 'paki' was no worse than 'cracker' or 'wh***y'. In a very basic way, that 'prole' remark made it as clear as anything how it's not just words. Him calling me a 'prole' had a bite to it that me calling him, say, 'a rich bastard' just didn't. And that bite came from history, and from the system we lived under.

The world is essenitally designed by and for the white, straight male, preferrably with money. The few concessions or accomodations to people who are not white, straight or male are met with cries of 'pandering!' or 'political correctness gone mad!'. This is because straightness, whiteness and maleness are a given. They are the 'norm'. We don't notice it, as we don't notice the air we breathe until it's polluted. I don't believe such accomodations are a pollution, but those who don't see what they're trying to make room for do.

There are certain areas the non-S/W/M have tried to eke out as their own, and the S/W/M sort may find it unnerving entering these areas. Often, the S/W/M has created these areas in the first place, and the non-S/W/M make the best of it. A ghetto forms as non-S/W/M people give up on getting into S/W/M areas (be they geographical or social or economic etc) and group together instead.

So prejudice does everyone a diservice.

Back when I was in grade school, a kid whose mother allegedly had inherited a million dollars from her father (I say allegedly, because this little prick was a notorious liar) used to tease me for being "poor." As I remember, I just thought the guy was an as*hole, and thankfully didn't let him get to me.
In truth, my family wasn't any poorer than most of the other kids - who knows, maybe he thought my eccentric Aspie-ish behavior was a sign of poverty. His making fun of me for that was actually more biting.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Interesting dialect. It reminds me of Ulster Scots or traditional Scots which are both regional variations of English that we have here.


O stay, sweet warbling woodlark, stay,
Nor quit for me the trembling spray,
A hapless lover courts thy lay,
Thy soothing, fond complaining.
Again, again that tender part,
That I may catch thy melting art;
For surely that wad touch her heart
Wha kills me wi' disdaining.
Say, was thy little mate unkind,
And heard thee as the careless wind?
Oh, nocht but love and sorrow join'd,
Sic notes o' woe could wauken!
Thou tells o' never-ending care;
O'speechless grief, and dark despair:
For pity's sake, sweet bird, nae mair!
Or my poor heart is broken.

Robert Burns

The civil war was about state's rights. The right to own slaves and they wanted that right, extended to all new states.

Flags are just flags, they can't be racist. Only the observer is for thinking in a racist way.

The mountainous areas of Appalachia were largely pro-unionist. So were the German regions of Texas and AFAIK the Ozark regions. Where were your family exactly from?



No....but a significant portion of the southern population (as high as one in six in some cases if my numbers are remembered right) guarantees a sort of collective response.



The same way Russians were priviledged in the former Soviet Union to the point that everyone else could see it but them, yet they tended to be unaware of their priviledge



And that sort of thought is why people assume every single young male working with children is probably a pedophile.......

Could be, I didnt do much research on the subject, but I didnt think that was needed to make my point.

The Confederacy and the South were, and remain, profoundly racist. Otherwise, why would they vote Republican?


Yes it was. Read your various states states' declarations for secession. For example, Mississippi

http://avalon.law.yale.edu/19th_century/csa_missec.asp




They're a bunch of uneducated nuts. Why not just fly Al Qaeda flags? Al Qaeda also wanted to destroy our government.

Dear Warsie,sorry it's taken awhile but the computer screen hurts my eyes so I'll stay off for a day or two,my ancestors were from the Ozark region in Mo and Ark.Lots of families had relatives that fought for opposing sides,it really was brother against brother here.The violence intensified after the war because people started bushwhacking each other .It was a really bad time since families held grudges.And it it mostly Scotch- Irish and German here.

Excuse me AuntPariah,You do know Lincoln was Republican right?And my state sent a Democrat to the White House,President Bill Clinton.

While true, it's also true that the Republicans during Lincoln's time represented the left of American politics, while the southern Democrats were the right. Things got switched around during the 20th century, particularly since the Democrats became associated with the New Deal and civil rights, while southern Democrats from the 60's on jumped ship to the Republican party, which came to oppose everything the left represented.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

I forgot about another great Southern Democrat, the humble and honest peanut farmer from Plains,Ga. President Jimmy Carter.
From an interesting Civil War tidbit,one of the last Confederate generals to surrender was General Stand Waite,a Native American who surrendered three months after Lee.And I don't get the Al Qaeda flag bit,we had no intention of destroying America, we just wanted the right to govern ourselves.Isn't that what the American Revolution was about?I really doubt that Judah Phillip Benjamin,Democrat,Secretary of War for the CSA would agree with the Al Qaeda remark,you see he was Jewish.And the Al Qaeda remark is very disrespectful to all those Vets who are from the South and now serving their country.We've lost several young men to the war and maybe they did fly the Rebel flag but they went over seas and died under the Stars and Stripes.Don't sully their contribution.

They sullied their own damned reputations.