the ongoing anti- racism, anti- oppression thread

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

The problem here isn't the definition of race or skin color. It's that progressives have added the element of power to that definition.

Cant be racist against whites because they hold power. Therefore they should also conclude that if a white person lived in China, they should be free to utter Sino-centric slurs.

I think ignoring the power dynamic misses what makes racism harmful.

The consequence of racism against white people is near zero. If that changes we can then start to put energy into fighting it. It’s not that it isn’t racist without a power dynamic it’s that the racism doesn’t cause harm. This is besides that fact that it’s unliking that the Times editor actually hates white people.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by GGG

The problem with the Privilege position is that economic Privilege is a very significant type of Privilege. So if you have an educated, well paid Women or Person of Colour arguing that a poor rural religious person in Mississippi needs to check their privilege it breaks down.

In alike socio-economic groups white and male privilege certainly makes it easier to succeed and advance upward. However if a person is asking “white people” in general to check their privilege they also need to ask themselves if they have checked their socio-economic privilege.

The only ask regarding racially-based privilege is to compare like for like situations.

“Check your privilege” does not mean “Hey poor white factory worker, recognise the privilege you have over the rich black executive!” That’s a straw man. It’s not meant to override any and all other factors. That argument is generally used by the wealthy to activate the lower class to fight against their own interests.

Regarding where it “breaks down,” you’re probably right, but you can also see why it breaks down when white, middle-to-late aged men (like CliffFletcher) argue against it. People who have very much benefited from white privilege more so than younger generations with the continued rise of equality, and yet refuse to even acknowledge it.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

I suddenly feel so liberated. Free to be both a progressive and a bigot at the same time.

Got for it!

I'm not sure you'll get far. It's unacceptable in China, it should be unacceptable here.

Originally Posted by GGG

I think ignoring the power dynamic misses what makes racism harmful.

The consequence of racism against white people is near zero. If that changes we can then start to put energy into fighting it. It’s not that it isn’t racist without a power dynamic it’s that the racism doesn’t cause harm. This is besides that fact that it’s unliking that the Times editor actually hates white people.

I think that's a slippery slope. You're mixing racism with discrimination. I'm in a managerial position as are many visible minorities. If I never hired white people nobody would notice. But if I trend the other way, I might get a call from HR.

[Oil Stain]

Originally Posted by New Era

The system has been setup to protect a certain type of people. It has been obvious for as long as we've established the systems to rule the land. Whites setup the rules to protect their privilege. But now that the white majority is being threatened, and minorities are demanding equality and fair access those very systems white people have taken advantage of for decades, now there is a problem. When you're accustomed to privilege, the very attempt to offer equality feels like oppression.

Are you sure about that?

It seems to me that predominantly judeo-christian value countries do more to protect and enhance the lives of minorities through law then most/all other countries around the world.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by New Era

You're damned right its easier. Even in the very "traditionally Canadian" way you attempt to frame your comparison. As a white person you aren't profiled all day long by the majority.

So non-white Canadians in 2018 are profiled all day long by the majority?

Originally Posted by New Era

As you sit in your cubical at work it is much more likely you have the job in question over a visible minority because you had obvious advantages that the other people did not. As a white person you have things much easier because the system has been setup to benefit you.

Actually my workplace, in the tech sector, is disproportionately Asian. What systemic advantages have my Asians co-workers been granted to account for their disproportionate representation in these high-paying fields?

Originally Posted by New Era

The system was established by white people, and the laws and rules have been set up to maintain that systemic advantage. It may not be as overt in Canada as it is in the United States, but the same systemic advantage exists for the white majority.

What tangible, systemic advantages do white Canadians in 2018, as a group, have over people of color in Canada?

Originally Posted by New Era

And here is where the strawman has been constructed. No one is saying that everyone white person should feel the same, because every white person's situation is NOT the same. There are massive advantages for some white people over others. Those with money and position naturally have more power and access than those without. That is obvious, and holds regardless of culture.

And yet here on this forum, in the media, in entertainment, in academia, there is 5x or 10x more concern and anger expressed over racial and gender disparity than over economic disparity. Class is far more of a taboo than race.

The platform produced by the UK Labour party's most recent party conference included dozens of references to race and gender, and only a handful of references to class. A party that has it roots in workshop canteens is now the part of intersectionalists academics and gender columnists who went to Oxford. And not surprisingly, that party (along with the Democrat party in the U.S.) is hemorrhaging white working class voters.

Originally Posted by New Era

So who do you think has the advantage and better access? ...The WHITE 50 year old trying to retrain after his knees are shot from laying carpet for 30 years or the BLACK 50 year old trying to retrain after his knees are shot from laying carpet for 30 years?

Explain how the white carpet layer trying to retrain in Canada in 2018 has advantages and better access. What specific advantages are those?

Originally Posted by New Era

The system has been setup to protect a certain type of people.

Was the system in Canada set up to protect Jews and Asians?

Originally Posted by New Era

But now that the white majority is being threatened, and minorities are demanding equality and fair access those very systems white people have taken advantage of for decades, now there is a problem. When you're accustomed to privilege, the very attempt to offer equality feels like oppression.

What specific laws and government policies in Canada in 2018 do you think denies fair access to non-whites? Where is your evidence that most white Canadians are angry that our post-secondary institutions, for example, have increasingly non-white student bodies?

[JohnnyB]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

Got for it!

I'm not sure you'll get far. It's unacceptable in China, it should be unacceptable here.




I think that's a slippery slope. You're mixing racism with discrimination. I'm in a managerial position as are many visible minorities. If I never hired white people nobody would notice. But if I trend the other way, I might get a call from HR.

What are you basing that on? China is super racist.

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by JohnnyB

What are you basing that on? China is super racist.

I know. I'm basing it on if you get onto to weibo now and start posting anti-Chinese stuff, you wouldn't get defended like Sarah Jeong is by the progressives in America.

Heck they just banned Winnie The Pooh!

[GGG]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

The only ask regarding racially-based privilege is to compare like for like situations.

“Check your privilege” does not mean “Hey poor white factory worker, recognise the privilege you have over the rich black executive!” That’s a straw man. It’s not meant to override any and all other factors. That argument is generally used by the wealthy to activate the lower class to fight against their own interests.

Regarding where it “breaks down,” you’re probably right, but you can also see why it breaks down when white, middle-to-late aged men (like CliffFletcher) argue against it. People who have very much benefited from white privilege more so than younger generations with the continued rise of equality, and yet refuse to even acknowledge it.

I disagree it’s a straw man when presented in media. Anyone in a position to shout that people need check their privilege through the media is priveledged in some manner beyond the average viewer. It is a lecture, this presents the wedge to be used to make people vote against self interest

The concept of checking priveledge works much better on a Campus, in a work place or in everyday reactions to event that occurs than as a preachy social agenda to advocate change.

I also agree that any white male in the top 10% of earners should very much consider the benefits they received as a result of birth when reacting to events or others actions.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

Regarding where it “breaks down,” you’re probably right, but you can also see why it breaks down when white, middle-to-late aged men (like CliffFletcher) argue against it. People who have very much benefited from white privilege more so than younger generations with the continued rise of equality, and yet refuse to even acknowledge it.

What systematic privileges do you suppose I benefited from growing up in Calgary in the 70s and 80s?

[GirlySports]

Originally Posted by GGG

I also agree that any white male in the top 10% of earners should very much consider the benefits they received as a result of birth when reacting to events or others actions.

I think that's a dangerous generalization as well. They didn't all just benefit.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by GGG

The consequence of racism against white people is near zero.

The consequences of deliberately casting aside universalism is very bad. We're seeing it already. Without universalism, all we're left with is tribal warfare.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

What systematic privileges do you suppose I benefited from growing up in Calgary in the 70s and 80s?

Did you grow up on a reserve or a residential school?
How did your ancestors acquire any assets they have? Did you benefit from homesteading?
Were you born a male and therefore didn’t have the fact you might get pregnant held against you in your early career?
Were you ever let off with a warning from the police?

Did your ancestors immigrate from Europe without any kind of headtax?

[Flash Walken]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

What systematic privileges do you suppose I benefited from growing up in Calgary in the 70s and 80s?

You didn't get pulled away from your parents and sent to a residential school where you systemically raped, tortured and otherwise abused?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The consequences of deliberately casting aside universalism is very bad. We're seeing it already. Without universalism, all we're left with is tribal warfare.

I’m not saying racism against whites is okay.

I am saying it’s not worth any emotional or monetary effort in dealing with it. It’s a complete non-issue that should be dismissed out of hand.

If you can’t measure the consequence a problem and solution do not exist.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

What systematic privileges do you suppose I benefited from growing up in Calgary in the 70s and 80s?

This has already been explained. Being a white, straight male gave you advantages over those in similar circumstances in terms of education, economics, etc.

Are you arguing that, all other things being equal, there are absolutely zero advantages to being white, male, and straight in North America circa 1970/1980?

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think that's a dangerous generalization as well. They didn't all just benefit.

Except they did.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by GirlySports

I think that's a dangerous generalization as well. They didn't all just benefit.

Everyone in the top 10% regardless of gender or race benefited from some sort of advantage over their cohort. No one is self made.

[PepsiFree]

Originally Posted by CliffFletcher

The consequences of deliberately casting aside universalism is very bad. We're seeing it already. Without universalism, all we're left with is tribal warfare.

When has society ever been more geared towards “universalism” and less geared towards tribalism than it is today? Please name one time.

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by Flash Walken

You didn't get pulled away from your parents and sent to a residential school where you systemically raped, tortured and otherwise abused?

Neither did 99 per cent of Canadians (including most natives).

I am, however, part native. Does that reduce my White Privilege Rating by a few points?

[GirlySports]

If you compared Cliff and myself. Kind of the same age, I'm born in 79 and i think he is a little older.

I came to Calgary at age 8 from Malaysia. I think we have had fairly parallel lives growing up here.

I don't believe he's had advantages over me. We may have even crossed paths at some point.


As for natives, that's a huge problem. I don't know what's an acceptable solution. I've once mentioned that newcomers/immigrants get a slew of government programs to get them started and into the work force. Free english, free job training... Why not extend that program to natives.


"but we're not immigrants"

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by PepsiFree

When has society ever been more geared towards “universalism” and less geared towards tribalism than it is today? Please name one time.

Roughly 2004 to roughly 2012. We were really heading in the right direction there for a bit!