Random1 wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 11:18 am
Raggs wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 8:56 am
Random1 wrote: Sat Jan 16, 2021 12:24 amThe parts I am referring to are where the bbc do features on things like white privilege as being fact.
I consider the concept of white privilege as being racist in and of itself. And it’s that sort of thing that has people seeing the bbc as biased.
It really is simple. Presuming you live in the UK (not unfair if it's the BBC you're upset with), ask yourself one simple question. Would your life be harder or easier if you were black?
It's not saying that every white person was born with a silver spoon up their arse, or that they cannot have been through hardships, or that they're racist, but that for the majority, had they been black instead of white, or white instead of black, life would have been easier as a white person than as a black.
This is born out in the data too. Although switching to the US for a moment, the single most convincing point for me was the incidents of cars being stopped for being "suspicious" in the USA. Blacks are stopped significantly more than Whites. Except when it's night time, and you cannot see the driver's skin colour. Then the rates are effectively equal.
Interesting set of replies from everyone.
I know my views on this aren’t mainstream, but they aren’t I’ll informed - I’ve done a lot of reading and research into this topic, as I find it fascinating from a philosophical point of view.
‘Unpacking the knapsack’ is a classic piece of post modernist writing and is a genuine piece of new thinking - I just don’t agree with it and there is no scientific evidence at all that the central theme is true.
At the heart of my objection to the white privilege concept is that I have a fundamental dislike of applying collective guilt to an entire cohort (be that race, politics, gender etc etc).
In this instance, the premise of all white people being racist is repugnant to me. It’s like original sin; I was born white, and therefore I am racist to my core. That belief is racist in my book ie ascribing an attribute to an individual based upon their skin colour. I don’t get how people can argue, on a more than superficial level, that that isn’t the very definition of racism.
There are mixed race families. White privilege teaches mixed heritage kids that half their family is racist to them. I don’t like that connotation at all.
On the last point you raised rags, I get the police issue, and I think it’s a really good parallel - because cops disproportionately pull over black drivers, do you therefore believe that that is evidence that all white cops are racist? As that is what white privilege dictates.
It’s overly simplistic deductive rather than abductive reasoning that is utterly wrong IMO
On one of the points further up, on this being slightly off topic; I don’t agree with that either. I think the treating of trump supporters as some homogenous monolith by the media and the democrats is part of the reason that trumpism is a movement that has caused so much grief and will likely survive trump’s deserved downfall.
Ultimately it’s fucking lazy to treat all people of one demographic or another as having certain attributes - ascribing something as abhorrent as racism to a set of people, from birth, is classic tribalism and is at the core of hateful identity politics.
OK, from the top then.
Central theme is that life is harder for someone who is black, than white, given all other things are equal (in the UK/USA for starters). There is plenty of scientific evidence for this, I've given you some. White privilege is not calling all white people racist.
I feel no guilt for my white privilege. You shouldn't really tell people their emotions are wrong, but in this instance I feel it's due to a misunderstanding. White privilege doesn't mean that you personally have taken advantage of a black person, or that you are racist, just that your life has been easier. Just as the child of a billionaire should feel no guilt for being the child of a billionaire, their life is going to be significantly easier than the child of a destitute family. It's not about guilt, it's about recognising that you had advantages, there's nothing wrong with recognising that. I was privileged as a child to have a reasonably stable home life, live in a nice area, be blessed with some intelligence, enough to get a scholarship at the local private school etc. I feel no guilt about these facts, but I can recognise that such things are advantages over many others. White privilege is the same thing. My life was made better by the colour of my skin.
Systemic racism, such as cops, is more insidious than calling white cops racists, because all cops, regardless of colour, pull over black drivers more during the day. Imagine the thought that black people in general are more likely to be criminals, being so ingrained, that even blacks believe it when they're on the force? I'm not saying they're racist individuals either, but that the system they are part of imparts this. To bring it to another similar example, but one that has nothing to do with race again. When asked, young children are more likely to point to an image of a fat child, instead of a thin one, and say they're more likely to be a liar out of the two. All they see is numerous images of children of various sizes (line drawings, not photos etc), and inevitably, when asked who they think lies the most, they point to the fat kid. This is systemic. It's not saying that they are mean to every individual fat kid, or hate every one, but somewhere the idea has been planted that they are the most likely to be lying.
I'll be honest here. I felt exactly the same way as you when I first started hearing "White privilege." I have a few friends on facebook, one of whom I think takes the social justice warrior thing too far, but i learn a lot from them, and whilst I may disagree on some of what I consider their more niche views, at the same time, I come to understand these phrases better. I had the same reaction to when BLM first became a common phrase (before Flloyd), thinking All lives matter. Now I have come to understand that blm doesn't say ONLY blm, or BLM more than anyone else, but rather point out the fact that in the USA (and UK), that black lives, according to verifiable stats, seem to matter less than everyone else. All lives do indeed matter, and right now, it's the black lives that don't seem to be included in all lives matter in many situations.
No, white privilege probably doesn't apply in many countries. I've lived in countries where the colour of my skin has meant I was targeted by scams, pickpockets, abuse and rip off merchants, there the colour of my skin was not a privilege (though I had a great many other privileges over those people). However, we're primarily talking about the western world here, especially UK/USA.
A few questions for you to answer, please.
If I told you that you were privileged by being born the child of a billionaire, would you instantly assume that I'm saying you hate all poor people?
Do you think that underprivileged children that are raised in the poorest environments, have access only to the worst schools etc, are misnomered compared to those who are raised with access to far better facilities?
And a repeat of my earlier question. Assuming you were raised in the UK. If you were black (let's a melanin genetic mutation that simply led to your skin colour being far darker, all other things are the same), do you believe your life would have been harder, easier or the same?
