Discussing "White Privilege" Doesn't Work

A study has concluded in something that should be a surprise to precisely no one, talking about white privilege (and having mandatory classes on it) doesn't do anything to engender greater empathy towards minorities.

In fact - the only measurable thng it does apparently is *reduce* any empathy or sympathy for whites.

Colour me shocked:

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2019-22926-001

 

16 Likes

Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.

2 Likes
Slowshot - Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.


There are ways to discuss racism, systemic issues, and advantages that don't imply white people don't suffer.


Of course I'm aware that the term privilege doesn't mean white people don't suffer, it just means that they don't suffer because of their race. I'm also able to accept the data in a number of arenas that shows being a minority confers a statistically significant disadvantage in opportunity.


But the discourse has become so toxic, and our natures so generally tribal, that a potentially useful term is too easily molded into one that's completely unhelpful. 


It's why VERY privileged and wealthy liberals can refer to millions of other Americans as living in "Flyover" states, use terms like "White trash" and generally dismiss the opinions and lives of poor whites.


Sure we can discuss the academics behind privilege -- but even in the academic sense the term means less than nothing if by far the greatest determiner of advantage is ignored - wealth itself. Class is by far the biggest divide - and ignoring this is causing more problems than it solves.

8 Likes
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.


There are ways to discuss racism, systemic issues, and advantages that don't imply white people don't suffer.


Of course I'm aware that the term privilege doesn't mean white people don't suffer, it just means that they don't suffer because of their race. I'm also able to accept the data in a number of arenas that shows being a minority confers a statistically significant disadvantage in opportunity.


But the discourse has become so toxic, and our natures so generally tribal, that a potentially useful term is too easily molded into one that's completely unhelpful. 


It's why VERY privileged and wealthy liberals can refer to millions of other Americans as living in "Flyover" states, use terms like "White trash" and generally dismiss the opinions and lives of poor whites.


Sure we can discuss the academics behind privilege -- but even in the academic sense the term means less than nothing if by far the greatest determiner of advantage is ignored - wealth itself. Class is by far the biggest divide - and ignoring this is causing more problems than it solves.




I don't disagree with anything you said. I FULLY agree.

You mean to tell me that lecturing people about their whiteness and disregarding the struggles they've had to face in their lives to get where they are because they're white doesn't makes them empathetic to others struggles!?

Big surprise.

6 Likes
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.


There are ways to discuss racism, systemic issues, and advantages that don't imply white people don't suffer.


Of course I'm aware that the term privilege doesn't mean white people don't suffer, it just means that they don't suffer because of their race. I'm also able to accept the data in a number of arenas that shows being a minority confers a statistically significant disadvantage in opportunity.


But the discourse has become so toxic, and our natures so generally tribal, that a potentially useful term is too easily molded into one that's completely unhelpful. 


It's why VERY privileged and wealthy liberals can refer to millions of other Americans as living in "Flyover" states, use terms like "White trash" and generally dismiss the opinions and lives of poor whites.


Sure we can discuss the academics behind privilege -- but even in the academic sense the term means less than nothing if by far the greatest determiner of advantage is ignored - wealth itself. Class is by far the biggest divide - and ignoring this is causing more problems than it solves.




I will add that it's sort of frustrating that (speaking in generalities here, I know it's not universal) those who are most against admitting the notion of white privilege tend to be those most opposed to the sort of wealth redistribution mechanisms that would most effectively address the class/wealth disparity.

If you can never address problem B until you address problem A, but you're unwilling to address problem A, I can understand when people dealing with problem B would be a little up in arms eventually.

Slowshot - 
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.


There are ways to discuss racism, systemic issues, and advantages that don't imply white people don't suffer.


Of course I'm aware that the term privilege doesn't mean white people don't suffer, it just means that they don't suffer because of their race. I'm also able to accept the data in a number of arenas that shows being a minority confers a statistically significant disadvantage in opportunity.


But the discourse has become so toxic, and our natures so generally tribal, that a potentially useful term is too easily molded into one that's completely unhelpful. 


It's why VERY privileged and wealthy liberals can refer to millions of other Americans as living in "Flyover" states, use terms like "White trash" and generally dismiss the opinions and lives of poor whites.


Sure we can discuss the academics behind privilege -- but even in the academic sense the term means less than nothing if by far the greatest determiner of advantage is ignored - wealth itself. Class is by far the biggest divide - and ignoring this is causing more problems than it solves.




I don't disagree with anything you said. I FULLY agree.



Oh I know - I was just expanding on my original comment a bit.


It's frustrating watching current political discourse. We've always been subject to tribal/virtue signalling impulses - but the internet and social media seems to have sucked any remaining nuance out of these discussions. Like on the one hand it's important to not pretend there aren't any problems, and on the other - we need to avoid overly simplistic theories or policies that do more harm than good.


 

robert bentley -

A study has concluded in something that should be a surprise to precisely no one, talking about white privilege (and having mandatory classes on it) doesn't do anything to engender greater empathy towards minorities.

In fact - the only measurable thng it does apparently is *reduce* any empathy or sympathy for whites.

Colour me shocked:

https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2019-22926-001

 

White people, men moreso than women, are the single most persecuted group in North America.

6 Likes

reverse racism and bigotry is the new norm.

Get used to it,

Everyone hates white people, mostly men. Big money in it.

2 Likes
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - 
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.


There are ways to discuss racism, systemic issues, and advantages that don't imply white people don't suffer.


Of course I'm aware that the term privilege doesn't mean white people don't suffer, it just means that they don't suffer because of their race. I'm also able to accept the data in a number of arenas that shows being a minority confers a statistically significant disadvantage in opportunity.


But the discourse has become so toxic, and our natures so generally tribal, that a potentially useful term is too easily molded into one that's completely unhelpful. 


It's why VERY privileged and wealthy liberals can refer to millions of other Americans as living in "Flyover" states, use terms like "White trash" and generally dismiss the opinions and lives of poor whites.


Sure we can discuss the academics behind privilege -- but even in the academic sense the term means less than nothing if by far the greatest determiner of advantage is ignored - wealth itself. Class is by far the biggest divide - and ignoring this is causing more problems than it solves.




I don't disagree with anything you said. I FULLY agree.



Oh I know - I was just expanding on my original comment a bit.


It's frustrating watching current political discourse. We've always been subject to tribal/virtue signalling impulses - but the internet and social media seems to have sucked any remaining nuance out of these discussions. Like on the one hand it's important to not pretend there aren't any problems, and on the other - we need to avoid overly simplistic theories or policies that do more harm than good.


 




God, you're effectively shaming me, here. I succumb to the temptation to shit talk instead of actually engage on this site all the time (see my first response for an example).

It's just so tiring to make an honest effort when you see posts like the two below your last post.

Slowshot - 
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.


There are ways to discuss racism, systemic issues, and advantages that don't imply white people don't suffer.


Of course I'm aware that the term privilege doesn't mean white people don't suffer, it just means that they don't suffer because of their race. I'm also able to accept the data in a number of arenas that shows being a minority confers a statistically significant disadvantage in opportunity.


But the discourse has become so toxic, and our natures so generally tribal, that a potentially useful term is too easily molded into one that's completely unhelpful. 


It's why VERY privileged and wealthy liberals can refer to millions of other Americans as living in "Flyover" states, use terms like "White trash" and generally dismiss the opinions and lives of poor whites.


Sure we can discuss the academics behind privilege -- but even in the academic sense the term means less than nothing if by far the greatest determiner of advantage is ignored - wealth itself. Class is by far the biggest divide - and ignoring this is causing more problems than it solves.




I will add that it's sort of frustrating that (speaking in generalities here, I know it's not universal) those who are most against admitting the notion of white privilege tend to be those most opposed to the sort of wealth redistribution mechanisms that would most effectively address the class/wealth disparity.

If you can never address problem B until you address problem A, but you're unwilling to address problem A, I can understand when people dealing with problem B would be a little up in arms eventually.



Agreed. 


I'd also like to add (furthering my previous comment about tribalism) that many people lose their mind when they hear "wealth distribution" as they think this automatically means communism or something. In reality - it's what should be happening under capitalism and COULD be happening under capitalism/free market if there were greater worker rights and greater controls on corporate power.


Basically - one of the great promises of capitalism was that as people became more productive and more wealth generated, this greater wealth would improve everyone's lives. But as we've seen - absolutely dramatic increases in productivity and gargantuan increases in wealth have resulted in a very slight increase in wages for 90% of the population and an exponential increase in the wealth of the people who already had it.


This is something that needs to be corrected if the capitalist society is to remain healthy and get stronger. And these measures are seen in other parts of the world where they have both a free market economy AND greater controls on how much power any one corporation can weild.


So while the initial comment was about the identity politics of the left, this one is about the identity politics of the right: an irrational response to anything that could curtail corporate power in the interest of a far more healthy society.


And as you're obviously aware - it's far easier to address demographically based prejudices if people aren't already struggling a great deal with poverty.

1 Like

It really sucks that all white people are hated on because a very small group of 1-2% of them have wealth and power. 

As a white person who grew up in a family below the poverty line, I'm pretty sick of being told I am priveledged and had advantages by rich minorities. 

If you some poor black person wants to bitch about being born into a poor family, I'll listen. But when it's these rich minorities born into wealth and privledge who go to fucking Harvard and then complain about white privilege. Fuck those pieces of shit.

6 Likes
Slowshot - Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.

Most of the advantages are just not having disadvantages.

 

I can understand why people don't want to have to be disadvantaged for equality to happen.

 

Better we just try to kill the disadvantages

 

 

1 Like
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - 
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.


There are ways to discuss racism, systemic issues, and advantages that don't imply white people don't suffer.


Of course I'm aware that the term privilege doesn't mean white people don't suffer, it just means that they don't suffer because of their race. I'm also able to accept the data in a number of arenas that shows being a minority confers a statistically significant disadvantage in opportunity.


But the discourse has become so toxic, and our natures so generally tribal, that a potentially useful term is too easily molded into one that's completely unhelpful. 


It's why VERY privileged and wealthy liberals can refer to millions of other Americans as living in "Flyover" states, use terms like "White trash" and generally dismiss the opinions and lives of poor whites.


Sure we can discuss the academics behind privilege -- but even in the academic sense the term means less than nothing if by far the greatest determiner of advantage is ignored - wealth itself. Class is by far the biggest divide - and ignoring this is causing more problems than it solves.




I will add that it's sort of frustrating that (speaking in generalities here, I know it's not universal) those who are most against admitting the notion of white privilege tend to be those most opposed to the sort of wealth redistribution mechanisms that would most effectively address the class/wealth disparity.

If you can never address problem B until you address problem A, but you're unwilling to address problem A, I can understand when people dealing with problem B would be a little up in arms eventually.



Agreed. 


I'd also like to add (furthering my previous comment about tribalism) that many people lose their mind when they hear "wealth distribution" as they think this automatically means communism or something. In reality - it's what should be happening under capitalism and COULD be happening under capitalism/free market if there were greater worker rights and greater controls on corporate power.


Basically - one of the great promises of capitalism was that as people became more productive and more wealth generated, this greater wealth would improve everyone's lives. But as we've seen - absolutely dramatic increases in productivity and gargantuan increases in wealth have resulted in a very slight increase in wages for 90% of the population and an exponential increase in the wealth of the people who already had it.


This is something that needs to be corrected if the capitalist society is to remain healthy and get stronger. And these measures are seen in other parts of the world where they have both a free market economy AND greater controls on how much power any one corporation can weild.


So while the initial comment was about the identity politics of the left, this one is about the identity politics of the right: an irrational response to anything that could curtail corporate power in the interest of a far more healthy society.


And as you're obviously aware - it's far easier to address demographically based prejudices if people aren't already struggling a great deal with poverty.




Fact, people are generally decent if they're doing alright for themselves.

Slowshot - 
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - 
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.


There are ways to discuss racism, systemic issues, and advantages that don't imply white people don't suffer.


Of course I'm aware that the term privilege doesn't mean white people don't suffer, it just means that they don't suffer because of their race. I'm also able to accept the data in a number of arenas that shows being a minority confers a statistically significant disadvantage in opportunity.


But the discourse has become so toxic, and our natures so generally tribal, that a potentially useful term is too easily molded into one that's completely unhelpful. 


It's why VERY privileged and wealthy liberals can refer to millions of other Americans as living in "Flyover" states, use terms like "White trash" and generally dismiss the opinions and lives of poor whites.


Sure we can discuss the academics behind privilege -- but even in the academic sense the term means less than nothing if by far the greatest determiner of advantage is ignored - wealth itself. Class is by far the biggest divide - and ignoring this is causing more problems than it solves.




I don't disagree with anything you said. I FULLY agree.



Oh I know - I was just expanding on my original comment a bit.


It's frustrating watching current political discourse. We've always been subject to tribal/virtue signalling impulses - but the internet and social media seems to have sucked any remaining nuance out of these discussions. Like on the one hand it's important to not pretend there aren't any problems, and on the other - we need to avoid overly simplistic theories or policies that do more harm than good.


 




God, you're effectively shaming me, here. I succumb to the temptation to shit talk instead of actually engage on this site all the time (see my first response for an example).

It's just so tiring to make an honest effort when you see posts like the two below your last post.



Lol - I totally understand. I've decided to try and post more with a conscious effort to avoid shit-talking for its own sake.


If I make a logical point and use data/studies to back it up but the response becomes some iteration of "cuck libtard faggot" then I might reply in kind. But I'll try as a rule to read what's being written in good faith. 


It's sort of the reason why my posts are genuine criticisms of the left. Even though I identify as fairly left (although some would call me "centrist") - I want it to be clear I'm aware of the numerous problems associated with some left wing ideologies.


 

1 Like
Jayn200 -

It really sucks that all white people are hated on because a very small group of 1-2% of them have wealth and power. 

As a white person who grew up in a family below the poverty line, I'm pretty sick of being told I am priveledged and had advantages by rich minorities. 

If you some poor black person wants to bitch about being born into a poor family, I'll listen. But when it's these rich minorities born into wealth and privledge who go to fucking Harvard and then complain about white privilege. Fuck those pieces of shit.

I feel like the issue is really the language.

 

As you've pointed out, being white doesn't mean you were born into money.

 

The "privilege" as I see it is essentially getting the benefit of the doubt ...not having the cops pay extra attention to you, not having an employer toss your application in the trash because of your name, etc

1 Like

i'd color your white, you racist.

Slowshot - 
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - 
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.


There are ways to discuss racism, systemic issues, and advantages that don't imply white people don't suffer.


Of course I'm aware that the term privilege doesn't mean white people don't suffer, it just means that they don't suffer because of their race. I'm also able to accept the data in a number of arenas that shows being a minority confers a statistically significant disadvantage in opportunity.


But the discourse has become so toxic, and our natures so generally tribal, that a potentially useful term is too easily molded into one that's completely unhelpful. 


It's why VERY privileged and wealthy liberals can refer to millions of other Americans as living in "Flyover" states, use terms like "White trash" and generally dismiss the opinions and lives of poor whites.


Sure we can discuss the academics behind privilege -- but even in the academic sense the term means less than nothing if by far the greatest determiner of advantage is ignored - wealth itself. Class is by far the biggest divide - and ignoring this is causing more problems than it solves.




I will add that it's sort of frustrating that (speaking in generalities here, I know it's not universal) those who are most against admitting the notion of white privilege tend to be those most opposed to the sort of wealth redistribution mechanisms that would most effectively address the class/wealth disparity.

If you can never address problem B until you address problem A, but you're unwilling to address problem A, I can understand when people dealing with problem B would be a little up in arms eventually.



Agreed. 


I'd also like to add (furthering my previous comment about tribalism) that many people lose their mind when they hear "wealth distribution" as they think this automatically means communism or something. In reality - it's what should be happening under capitalism and COULD be happening under capitalism/free market if there were greater worker rights and greater controls on corporate power.


Basically - one of the great promises of capitalism was that as people became more productive and more wealth generated, this greater wealth would improve everyone's lives. But as we've seen - absolutely dramatic increases in productivity and gargantuan increases in wealth have resulted in a very slight increase in wages for 90% of the population and an exponential increase in the wealth of the people who already had it.


This is something that needs to be corrected if the capitalist society is to remain healthy and get stronger. And these measures are seen in other parts of the world where they have both a free market economy AND greater controls on how much power any one corporation can weild.


So while the initial comment was about the identity politics of the left, this one is about the identity politics of the right: an irrational response to anything that could curtail corporate power in the interest of a far more healthy society.


And as you're obviously aware - it's far easier to address demographically based prejudices if people aren't already struggling a great deal with poverty.




Fact, people are generally decent if they're doing alright for themselves.



YUP


They're also generally smarter, less likely to succumb to numerous problems like addiction, and generally better able to maintain a healthy viable society. 

1 Like
Slowshot -
robert bentley - 
Slowshot - Agreed, it's no surprise. I've had the conversation enough times here that I realize people simply aren't interested in addressing their own advantages, if the end game is to remove those advantages.


There are ways to discuss racism, systemic issues, and advantages that don't imply white people don't suffer.


Of course I'm aware that the term privilege doesn't mean white people don't suffer, it just means that they don't suffer because of their race. I'm also able to accept the data in a number of arenas that shows being a minority confers a statistically significant disadvantage in opportunity.


But the discourse has become so toxic, and our natures so generally tribal, that a potentially useful term is too easily molded into one that's completely unhelpful. 


It's why VERY privileged and wealthy liberals can refer to millions of other Americans as living in "Flyover" states, use terms like "White trash" and generally dismiss the opinions and lives of poor whites.


Sure we can discuss the academics behind privilege -- but even in the academic sense the term means less than nothing if by far the greatest determiner of advantage is ignored - wealth itself. Class is by far the biggest divide - and ignoring this is causing more problems than it solves.




I will add that it's sort of frustrating that (speaking in generalities here, I know it's not universal) those who are most against admitting the notion of white privilege tend to be those most opposed to the sort of wealth redistribution mechanisms that would most effectively address the class/wealth disparity.

If you can never address problem B until you address problem A, but you're unwilling to address problem A, I can understand when people dealing with problem B would be a little up in arms eventually.

People who are unwilling to address problem A, in many cases, don't believe there is a problem A.  They think its a fabrication. This is probably due to the fact that there are many other races that seem to be doing great... Even better than whites... In the USA.

Jayn200 - 

It really sucks that all white people are hated on because a very small group of 1-2% of them have wealth and power. 

As a white person who grew up in a family below the poverty line, I'm pretty sick of being told I am priveledged and had advantages by rich minorities. 

If you some poor black person wants to bitch about being born into a poor family, I'll listen. But when it's these rich minorities born into wealth and privledge who go to fucking Harvard and then complain about white privilege. Fuck those pieces of shit.


How about from a white person who grew up in a family below the poverty line, like me. Somebody who was on welfare as a kid, and food stamps, and got free lunch at school, and food from the back of the grocery store, and clothes from 2nd hand store? Somebody who lived in van for a while as a kid, and never had shit?

You're fucking privileged. Just like I was, and am. Because as shitty as we had it, it was better than being in those exact same circumstances and being black, too.

I know this because I've seen it from the other side, too. I do nicely for myself. Went to college, then to grad school. Got a job, bought a house in a nice neighborhood, live in a nice town in the richest place in the country.

It's STILL better to be me than it is to be somebody in the exact same cirumstances as me, but black.

1 Like