Why did the whiteness thread get shut?

RolandTD20Kdrummer

The original list was a little over the top...what was there like 50 items or something?

ryan198

surferdude wrote:

What's the growth trend for both these groups. I would expect to find black poverty rates decreasing and white poverty rates increasing.
I think the predjudice now a days is based much more on income than color. The US is a very tough place to be poor. The social safety net provided makes it very hard to make the climb out of poverty. I think making it raced based just muddies the waters and makes accurate analysis impossible. Making it race based makes it an emotional topic.

I will have to check again, but I believe that while there is an increasing level of white people getting poorer, blacks are still easily ahead. Check Lawrence Grossberg's book Caught in the Crossfire. I agree that the US is a very tough place to be poor, I was poor most of my life, and I am white, yet I still recognize that I was afforded some privilege based on the color of my skin. As for your second point I will have to again disagree in that race makes up part of the context of understanding a particular issue. Again going back to Grossberg, "context is everything, and everything is context"....I think that by generalizing how race and class co-exist to create the initial lens with which to look at individual situations allows for more accurate analysis...but that's just me.

Ahnimus

ryan198 wrote:

I will have to check again, but I believe that while there is an increasing level of white people getting poorer, blacks are still easily ahead. Check Lawrence Grossberg's book Caught in the Crossfire. I agree that the US is a very tough place to be poor, I was poor most of my life, and I am white, yet I still recognize that I was afforded some privilege based on the color of my skin. As for your second point I will have to again disagree in that race makes up part of the context of understanding a particular issue. Again going back to Grossberg, "context is everything, and everything is context"....I think that by generalizing how race and class co-exist to create the initial lens with which to look at individual situations allows for more accurate analysis...but that's just me.

Or a more prejudiced analysis.

ryan198

Ahnimus wrote:

I mean, where I live a Black, Hispanic, yellow, pink or green person has just as much oppotunity as anyone else. I don't hear black people saying they are oppressed, they don't picket in the street. The only people here that tend to speak out are Native/Aboriginals and Women. Neither of which is currently being oppressed and the perceived differences are somewhat exagerative.

do they really have the same opportunity to be a corporate CEO as, say George Bush's daughters? I guess that's what I'm getting at, is that if this is supposedly an equal society, and everyone has an equal opportunity to get to the top, then why isn't that the case. I assert that is not the case because white men own the companies, they run the government at its highest levels, they own the means of communication, and they are the one's who have to relinquish it to others, be they of different class/race/gender/sexuality.

ryan198

Ahnimus wrote:

Or a more prejudiced analysis.

do we not look at any situation through a prejudicial lens? By this I mean, that word necessariy suggests that you are using your past knowledge to formulate an opinion (pre-judge) on the present. My feeling is that if I am already going to be prejudicial, as is anyone else unless they are like the goldfish in Ani DiFranco's Little Plastic Castle song, then I am going to do my absolute best to understand the situation as best as I can by getting the most information that I can about a given topic. If you choose to live in a world of self-centeredness, and say that you are being un-pejudiced then I would certainly disagree.

Ahnimus

ryan198 wrote:

do they really have the same opportunity to be a corporate CEO as, say George Bush's daughters? I guess that's what I'm getting at, is that if this is supposedly an equal society, and everyone has an equal opportunity to get to the top, then why isn't that the case. I assert that is not the case because white men own the companies, they run the government at its highest levels, they own the means of communication, and they are the one's who have to relinquish it to others, be they of different class/race/gender/sexuality.

Uh, no I don't have equal opportunity, but I'm also white. You are referring to some kind of classism that has nothing to do with race. Oprah isn't going to cut me a cheque either. Bottom line is, no one cares about me or will do anything for me. My taxes get spent on social programs I'll probably never benefit from. Meanwhile I make $30,000/year. Not a lot of money. But I make more than a McDonald's employee simply because I got a bit of education. A native friend of mine has a bit more education than me and he's a network administrator making lots of money. Plus his dad is/was the chief of Rama and he get's a cheque annually from the Casino Rama.

So yeah, his daddy helped him get where he is, but he also went on to become educated and work towards having a career. This guy really doesn't like the typical native view of Canada which defies the system and just complains about it all the time. This guy knew what he had to do and did it instead of whining about being Native.

RolandTD20Kdrummer

ryan198 wrote:

do we not look at any situation through a prejudicial lens? By this I mean, that word necessariy suggests that you are using your past knowledge to formulate an opinion (pre-judge) on the present. My feeling is that if I am already going to be prejudicial, as is anyone else unless they are like the goldfish in Ani DiFranco's Little Plastic Castle song, then I am going to do my absolute best to understand the situation as best as I can by getting the most information that I can about a given topic. If you choose to live in a world of self-centeredness, and say that you are being un-pejudiced then I would certainly disagree.

there are very successfull people of all races... layers, doctor's, CEO's, talk show hosts comedians, TV reporters,politics.. etc.. pretty much everywhere I can think of

surferdude

ryan198 wrote:

do they really have the same opportunity to be a corporate CEO as, say George Bush's daughters? I guess that's what I'm getting at, is that if this is supposedly an equal society, and everyone has an equal opportunity to get to the top, then why isn't that the case. I assert that is not the case because white men own the companies, they run the government at its highest levels, they own the means of communication, and they are the one's who have to relinquish it to others, be they of different class/race/gender/sexuality.

Explain to me why some of the highest paying jobs in America, pro sports, don't follow this racial model. Why don't we complain about the disproportionate number of blacks in the NBA or NFL and the lack of latinos?

By making it race back you lose sight of the reality of the individual.

boxwine_in_hell

Whitey dont likes to be mades funs of

RolandTD20Kdrummer

boxwine_in_hell wrote:

Whitey dont likes to be mades funs of

who does though?

Ahnimus

boxwine_in_hell wrote:

Whitey dont likes to be mades funs of

It's more about being called something you are not.

For example. "Blacks are thugs" is an offensive statement. "Whites are racist" is also offensive.

surferdude

boxwine_in_hell wrote:

Whitey dont likes to be mades funs of

I'd say given recent events that some students don't like it either.

JOEJOEJOE

onelongsong wrote:

what about things like scholorships and other benefits that are available to everyone but whites? why is a 4.5 gpa student passed by for scholorship because they're white yet it's given to the minority with the 3.0 gpa just because they're not white?

first; show me the equality in that; then explain why it was ok for minorities to march for equality yet whites shouldn't march for those same rights.

Show me the equality in the fact that black people were denied use of certain water fountains and restrooms not too long ago.

I think that it is never ok for the majority to march for rights, especially since they have always had more rights at the expense of the minority.

White people used to get into schools and jobs, even though there were minorities who were more well-qualified.

Payback is a bitch, aint it!

Its important to consider the past before complaining anout the present.

soulsinging

JOEJOEJOE wrote:

Show me the equality in the fact that black people were denied use of certain water fountains and restrooms not too long ago.

I think that it is never ok for the majority to march for rights, especially since they have always had more rights at the expense of the minority.

White people used to get into schools and jobs, even though there were minorities who were more well-qualified.

Payback is a bitch, aint it!

Its important to consider the past before complaining anout the present.

jim crow ended 40 years ago. sure, there are strides to be made, but somebody in that thread was calling all white people racist devils who all uniformly hated and oppressed poor black victims. that's a bit offensive. regardless of where you stand on the color or affirmative action line.

surferdude

JOEJOEJOE wrote:

Its important to consider the past before complaining anout the present.

You will never ever have equality with this attitude.

Ahnimus

JOEJOEJOE wrote:

Show me the equality in the fact that black people were denied use of certain water fountains and restrooms not too long ago.

I think that it is never ok for the majority to march for rights, especially since they have always had more rights at the expense of the minority.

White people used to get into schools and jobs, even though there were minorities who were more well-qualified.

Payback is a bitch, aint it!

Its important to consider the past before complaining anout the present.

Exactly, consider the irony in "Payback" and the possibility of similar consequences.

It's important to remember the past, lest we repeat it. Not to repeat it.

JOEJOEJOE

soulsinging wrote:

jim crow ended 40 years ago. sure, there are strides to be made, but somebody in that thread was calling all white people racist devils who all uniformly hated and oppressed poor black victims. that's a bit offensive. regardless of where you stand on the color or affirmative action line.

I agree that blanket comments are lame, but just think, 40 years ago, black people were uniformly hated based on their race, not their individuality.

Ahnimus

JOEJOEJOE wrote:

I agree that blanket comments are lame, but just think, 40 years ago, black people were uniformly hated based on their race, not their individuality.

Why do we need to live in the past?

lucylespian

I think teh thread was shut because it clearly breached forum rules. Even by our normal standards of robust debate here on teh train, I think that it was overtly racist and bordered on inciting racial hatrred. The fact that it was hatred directed against whites does not change that. I won't be surprised if che has been suspended or banned.

The mods may have also had concerens about copy-cat crimes being committed and in teh surrent climate of unrest over teh vtech murders, esp since it was committed by an asian, though after emigrating at age 7, he was hardly a foreigner.

I suspect that there will be an escalation in the number of school shootings like this, adn I think the mods would be wise to be concerned that there is no incitement of any form of armed rebellion on this forum. Che's username alone suggests that he favoured armed revolution, and many of his posts back that up.

I was a bit surprised the thread ran as long as it did.

I

Ahnimus

Yesterday I came into work and someone had gotten into my pizza pockets. Today they took two more. I'm over it already. It happened less than 24 hours ago, but it's wonder under the bridge as far as I'm concerned.