What is white privilege?

The response does speak for itself. As does the fact that you can't rebut it, so you make some generalized non-response.

 

The focus in this thread is "white privilege" and its negative effect, if so, on blacks. I find whites that breed on welfare just as disgusting, but there are percentage-wise fewer of them. In a thread on that subject I would expound further.

What do you mean, "Who is the opposition?" IMO there is no universal white privilege. From my experience the wealthiest whites keep it carefully in their own sphere and don't let much if any slop over onto disadvantaged whites. IMO more blacks than poor whites are helped by them, but more in Africa at this point, I gather, from Bill Gates' "cost effectiveness" crack and Angelina Jolie's adoption antics.

The bottom line is that no underclass whites in the US get any help from anyone unless they act out. Then they might start to get some of the benefits that young blacks do, like Headstart and free counseling. But if you just plug along and get OK grades, no one gives a damn about you or even sees you, even if you can't afford to get a decent pair of shoes or participate in school sports or are being chased home from school by bullies every day. Where do you think all the white school shooters come from?

If there is a point you really want me to address that involves my opinion, point it out, but don't expect a research-laden dissertation from me. I already know the whites of wealth have privilege, but the rest of us don't. I have in here been trying to convey that there is no point in American blacks waiting around for the great white savior to somehow feel sorry, kiss and make better, because the ultra-wealthy ones are ashhats that are already screwing all of us, and your fellow white screwees are not going to subscribe to the racist black illusion that we are actually part of the problem, because we don't have that perception. It is even worse to be isolated and invisible.

 

By posting a rebuttal, I would be acknowledging the validity of your argument. No, thank you.

 

I can see why you would wish to dodge the discussion altogether, as you've already been proven wrong.

 

If it is true, you ought to validate it. Good social policy can never be built on lies. It is the cognitive dissonance which creates racial tension. Tact, tolerance and civility is just construed as condescension when the subpar performance of blacks is touted as equal to that of whites.

 

When I asked "Who is the opposition?", I was just wondering whether the main object of your displeasure was the blacks who exploited our welfare programs, or was it the culture from which this system evolved and made them dependent on it.

Could it also be that many blacks have been assimilated into a culture extraneous to our own because of non-acceptance or overt prejudice?

Degradation and put-downs do not inspire confidence. Those who are expected to behave as peers should be treated as equals.

 

Thing is Blacks do not have to have sub-par performance.

Many studies have shown that given equal conditions....all Human Races I.Q.'s exist at about the same ratio's.

But when people go and make exceptions and say....."Well...because your BLACK your score is GOOD ENOUGH!"

As far as I am concerned that is a form of DISCRIMINATION!!!

AboveAlpha

 

I'm sure that you must realize that you are advocating the promulgation of white supremacy.

 

The studies I refer to are undisputed peer reviewed scientific studies and are not "just an opinion of the people" as claimed. Only a person completely ignorant of science could make such an absurd claim.

 

In point of fact when Affirmative Action guidelines are applied, often for college admissions that many object to, the "score" is good enough. The first criteria is that the applicant must be qualified and meet or exceed the minimum "score" standards. Let me provide an example.

The college will have a minimum admission score on a 1-100 scale of 70. The colllege will give preferential treatment to those that score in the top 10% on the admission tests while they will also have a lot of applicants with scores between 70-90. Where the objection comes from is if a white person with perhaps a score in the 80's is not admitted while a black with a score in the 70's is admitted to increase black enrollment when they are underrepresented in the college. The black person is "qualified" because their score is above the minimum admission score. Basically preferential treatment is provided at both the top and bottom of the qualification scale albeit for different reasons.

Those with anti-black racial prejudice object because a higher scoring white person may be denied enrollment but it isn't because the black person wasn't qualified. The college could take all of the applicants that scored above 70 and simply use a lottery to determine which are admitted but that's based upon random chance which would not be in the best interests of either the students, the college, or society. Instead the college uses two different criteria for establishing preferential treatment in admissions for the benefit of the students, the college, and society.

The same is true in all Affirmative Action programs because only "qualified" individuals that meet or exceed the eligibility standards are eligible for preferential treatment and, in fact, under federal Affirmative Action guidelines for contracted private companies such as Boeing and Lockheed there's no preferential treatment at all. These programs seek to achieve diversity without preferential treatment and there are many ways to accomplish this.

Of course we can find rare exceptions to the above but they are exceedingly rare and by design Affirmative Action only provides preferential treatment for qualified individuals that are historically and continue to be discriminated against.

 

There's a saying in science that "anecdotal data equals no data at all." You provide anecdotes that have no relevance to the knowledge we have about racial discrimination created by prejudice in the United States.

What we know from the scientific studies is that a black person must be significantly over-qualified for a position to over-come the anti-black racial prejudice in the hiring process and must also be a significantly superior performer on the job to receive advancement in most cases. We also know that a black person that's equally qualified and equally performing only receives about 60% of the compensation when compared to a white person. Those are the facts and numerous scientific studies have confirmed these facts. This isn't based upon a few anecdotal cases but instead is based upon scientific data collection.

What is ironic with the anecdotal case is that based upon personal experience it's known that the two blacks were superior because they were the "bosses" while based upon prejudice it's assumed that other blacks are inferior when all of the science disputes that conclusion.

Marxism (socialism) is an economic philosophy but an ignorant person wouldn't understand that. Racism can exist under Marxism just like it exists under Keynesianism or the Austrian School of Economics.

 

I was involved in auto racing for many years and there's a minimum weight limit for the racecar. A car that was "over-weight" couldn't compete with a car at the minimum weight limit because racing involves the accelleration of mass and the heavier the car the slower it accellerates. A black race car with more weight will reflect sub-par performance when compared to the lighter white race car.

Because of racial prejudice and discrimination we add "weight" to the black race car and that results in the "sub-par" performance. Remove the anti-black racial prejudice and discrimination and we reduce the weight of the "black race car" allowing equal performance when compared to the "white race car" and all of the science confirms this.

Instead we have those that just say the black car should compete with the white race car ignoring the additional weight the black race car is carrying and the only way that the black car can compete is if it has a more powerful engine, better suspension, and a superior driver at the wheel.

That is exactly what we see in society today. For a black to compete equally they need to be better educated, have superior job experience and performance, and the black person has to be more intelligent than the white person.

 

A heavier car could outrace a light car if it had a more powerful engine. I am suggesting that the white race car has a more powerful engine. All of science confirms this, btw.

-------------------------
Although Republicans were more likely than Democrats to express racial prejudice in the questions measuring explicit racism (79% among Republicans compared with 32% among Democrats), the implicit test found little difference between the two parties. That test showed a majority of both Democrats and Republicans held anti-black feelings (55% of Democrats and 64% of Republicans), as did about half of political independents (49%).

Source: 2012 AP Study on racial prejudice in America (link providee on request by PM)

 

Of course.

White supremacy is not a political position. It is an historical fact.

 

that was an editor's opinion, there was no data that supports that notion or any example why African American have got longer sentence then European American. By the way all people are similarly situated because they are people, but it does not mean their life are the same.
Asian people have a shortest sentences and negligent crime, it does not mean that there is an Asian privilege.

 

Exactly what do you not understand about SIMILARLY SITUATED?

 

I appreciate the honesty and the non-inflammatory way it was presented. This mindset/thought process still exists throughout the country and while many people pretend it doesn't, you'll make no bones about letting us know it does. Seriously, thanks.

 

I don't accept these racist slurs that black people got a lower IQ / poor impulse control etc as a valid argument.
That's too much arian race unfounded ideology.

What we do got is that black people get longer sentences than white people when in the same situation.
We also got white people's name have a clear privilege on the job market.
We also got black people getting less service in hospitals than white people.

That's white privilege. Proof is there.

 

Should not we be more specific when it comes to "undisputed studies". If you are planning to kill and rob white people should not you present at least something meaningful other then

"For example we know from a 2008 study and a 2012 study that respectively 71% and 79% of self-identified"
undisputed peer reviewed scientific studies

What are those studies in 2008 and 2012?
How such conclusions have been made?

If person dislike "no-go zones for whites" in the major U.S. cities does it mean that person is anti-black?

We need to examine those studies carefully, may be those studies are not about white privileges but you are using them to have uncontrolled power that allow you to shut white people indiscriminately.

 

It says rather clearly in my source:
"In the two years after the Booker ruling, sentences of blacks were on average 15.2% longer than the sentences of similarly situated whites, according to the Sentencing Commission report."

You got a major problem in comprehending what you read when you claim this is the opinion of the editor.

You're being a poor loser in this debate with this ranting what "similarly situated whites" actually means.

 

Yea, and Sentencing Commission report said nothing about similarity of situations, they just presented a data.
Again, if you are planning to prosecute people on the basis of editor's opinion, you not going to solve your problem.
I guess you have no problem, you just need an excuse to kill and rob people.

 

Every race in America has its poor. The term "white privilege" is a liberal construct that means that whites have an advantage over everyone else in America. But in America, Asian Americans are better off than every other race. So, do Asian Americans have an unfair advantage via station, circumstance, discrimination or conspiracy? The answer is clearly, no. They simply work harder, sacrifice more, apply themselves more, study harder, choose wisely, exercise patience and faith, invest wisely, keep their noses to the grindstone and so forth. Consequently, the term "white privilege" is a lie cooked up by socialists and thieves as a means to cannibalize their fellow Americans by appealing to envy, covetousness, and pure jealousy. It's a cheap power play by con artists. It's also worth noting that hispanics do better than blacks. "Hispanic privilege" anyone?

 

PS If blacks want to blame someone for their relative station in life. They should blame themselves, their white Democrat politicians and black Democrat middlemen like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. In freedom and salvation there is no sneaky way to success.

 

Well than its nothing.

 

Again Prove causation. If you can't than it's nothing.