[split] On Privilege

Quote:No, that's just your persistent ignorance. You're just throwing out anything to see what sticks, without any argument whatsoever. That does zero to refute my argument, but that's not the point is it? You're just desperately justifying what are obviously harmful racist policies and attitudes.

LOL! It totally refutes your claim that govt programs caused blacks to lapse into "barbarism" after the 60's. These other factors I listed are much more widespread and influential on the lives of black kids. It explains the dominance of the single mother family and the using of gangs and sports by black male teens for role models. And the drug situation makes it even worse as that is the quickest way to make money when you're in poverty without a college education. So just admit it. Democrats aren't to blame here. Nobody is to blame other than a society that made being black a major disadvantage to living a successful life. And hence the need for programs to help them out of this pit they are born into.

What makes most of the problems in this world isn't the colour of someones skin but that attitudes people have about people that are different.

Life does have it's circles and they are hard to break free from if attitudes are always forcing people back into them. Those attitudes can be held by others but they can also be held by the people that get stuck in those circles. It takes a lot to make any significant change to break out, those changes have to come from those trapped in those circles and those willing to support people to get out of those circles.

Arguing who's at fault or blaming fault on education, privilege, parents, gender, counties, colour or ability is just a scapegoat for not wanting to see that certain attitudes aren't just wrong but actually help no one.

I guess what I'm saying is that we are all part to blame and we all owe it to ourselves to understand sometimes that we are wrong... unfortunately in this current era (of the internet) it's very difficult for anyone to admit when or even if they are wrong, and that unfortunately means continuing circles for decades to come.

(Nov 19, 2017 07:46 AM)Magical Realist Wrote:

Quote:No, that's just your persistent ignorance. You're just throwing out anything to see what sticks, without any argument whatsoever. That does zero to refute my argument, but that's not the point is it? You're just desperately justifying what are obviously harmful racist policies and attitudes.

LOL! It totally refutes your claim that govt programs caused blacks to lapse into "barbarism" after the 60's. These other factors I listed are much more widespread and influential on the lives of black kids. It explains the dominance of the single mother family and the using of gangs and sports by black male teens for role models. And the drug situation makes it even worse as that is the quickest way to make money when you're in poverty without a college education. So just admit it. Democrats aren't to blame here. Nobody is to blame other than a society that made being black a major disadvantage to living a successful life. And hence the need for programs to help them out of this pit they are born into.

No. A bunch of random things that happened are not causative arguments. And do you really think all the violence in Chicago is the height of civility? O_o
Again, you're only proclaiming causation without even justifying the claim. You just named a bunch a things, and now you are only naming a bunch of results, without bothering to connect the two in any way.

Again, blacks were doing better at the height of Jim Crow...the height of overt racist Democrat terrorism. I suppose you think the Democrats were somehow "helping" them back then too, huh? What, did lynchings build character?

Quote:Again, you're only proclaiming causation without even justifying the claim. You just named a bunch a things, and now you are only naming a bunch of results, without bothering to connect the two in any way.

No..my argument is more logical because the factors can be seen reasonably to have deleterious effects on the raising of black kids. I don't need evidence that drugs hoid black kids back, or poverty, or coming from single parent families, or having no male role models, or gangs and crime, or racism. All these factors are self-evidently bad things for black kids, and it explains their setback in life much more successfully than your claim that govt programs caused it. You have been officially refuted. Ta ta...

(Nov 19, 2017 08:20 AM)stryder Wrote: What makes most of the problems in this world isn't the colour of someones skin but that attitudes people have about people that are different.

Life does have it's circles and they are hard to break free from if attitudes are always forcing people back into them.  Those attitudes can be held by others but they can also be held by the people that get stuck in those circles.  It takes a lot to make any significant change to break out, those changes have to come from those trapped in those circles and those willing to support people to get out of those circles.

Arguing who's at fault or blaming fault on education, privilege, parents, gender, counties, colour or ability is just a scapegoat for not wanting to see that certain attitudes aren't just wrong but actually help no one.

I guess what I'm saying is that we are all part to blame and we all owe it to ourselves to understand sometimes that we are wrong... unfortunately in this current era (of the internet) it's very difficult for anyone to admit when or even if they are wrong, and that unfortunately means continuing circles for decades to come.

there seems to be real volume of data being generated on this concept.
i wonder as you mention, how much is just fueling the fire where bi-partisan concepts are facilitated to simply provide more power and control to the small minority whom already have control or seek to usurp absolute control into a different minority group.

i think if anyone wants to evaluate the concept of equal opportunity then they only need look as far as how many private schools there are and what level of cost they run at to provide what is mostly deemed the best possible education opportunitys.
one would think the state(voters and general public) would seek to emulate the top achieving schools to then make sure that all children get an equal start with an education that allows them to learn.


as we come out of the ponsy-school/education system era  there are very profound lessons to be learnt.
one can only hope the general public are not too busy trying to battle egos of leadership(propogating a distopian ideology to their children to be at odds with societys power structures) to set about democratically making a change for the better.
some of the indicators are the concepts around law & order define a paradigm of incongruity to basic espoused principals of moral expectation.

if they vote for it, it will change, why are they not voting for it ?
why is it not changing ?

private schools are certainly not percieved as a liability & cost. They are seen as an investment & opportunity.


why are public/state schools seen as a cost instead of an investment ?
how can this basic process of public motivation be changed ?
is that too much social engineering to try and change it ?
is the will of the people expressed in the poor funding of state/public schooling ?

I think that in many cases the idea of 'privilege' is a thin cover for today's socially-acceptable and often mandatory left-racism. It's the assertion that members of hated groups (typically white Anglos) are recipients of unfair advantage and must be made the target of discrimination, just to even things out so to speak.

Too often it's a rationalization for racial and ethnic prejudice, hatred, resentment and discrimination. People get labeled as recipients of privilege simply on account of the color of their skin. So a white kid who comes from a poor disfunctional family, who got bullied in high school, ends up being denounced as 'privileged' by the smug comfortable university academics, people with no knowledge of or even any interest in his life circumstances.

He just has the wrong sex and skin color.

(Nov 19, 2017 04:29 PM)Yazata Wrote: I think that in many cases the idea of 'privilege' is a thin cover for today's socially-acceptable and often mandatory left-racism. It's the assertion that members of hated groups (typically white Anglos) are recipients of unfair advantage and must be made the target of discrimination, just to even things out so to speak.

Too often it's a rationalization for racial and ethnic prejudice, hatred, resentment and discrimination. People get labeled as recipients of privilege simply on account of the color of their skin. So a white kid who comes from a poor disfunctional family, who got bullied in high school, ends up being denounced as 'privileged' by the smug comfortable university academics, people with no knowledge of or even any interest in his life circumstances.

He just has the wrong sex and skin color.

White privilege isn't an attempt at reverse discrimination. It's the simple observation that if a black kid can be discriminated against based on his skin color, then a white kid can be favored because of his skin color. It's not saying he is an inferior race as racism assumes. It's saying that being white comes with it's own perks in our society. It goes hand in hand with racism. If a black kid is stereotyped as being more violent or lazy or stupid than a white kid, it follows that the white kid is being stereotyped as more benign or motivated or smart than the black kid. And that's a privileging based on white skin color.

A brief history of white privilege...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZN9mwhSrTdU

(Nov 19, 2017 08:55 AM)Magical Realist Wrote:

Quote:Again, you're only proclaiming causation without even justifying the claim. You just named a bunch a things, and now you are only naming a bunch of results, without bothering to connect the two in any way.

No..my argument is more logical because the factors can be seen reasonably to have deleterious effects on the raising of black kids. I don't need evidence that drugs hoid black kids back, or poverty, or coming from single parent families, or having no male role models, or gangs and crime, or racism. All these factors are self-evidently bad things for black kids, and it explains their setback in life much more successfully than your claim that govt programs caused it. You have been officially refuted. Ta ta...

Claiming you "don't need evidence" is an admission that you haven't made an argument. I already said single-parenthood is harmful, but where you fail to show a cause for single-parenthood, I showed how welfare incentivizes it (mostly because single mothers can get more benefits that married couples).

From the left-center Brookings Institute:
"Second, when couples do get married, public policy frequently punishes them economically. The U.S. tax code, for example, contains a marriage penalty for high-earner, two-income couples. And the earned income tax credit penalizes lower-wage married couples. Moreover, welfare rules have frequently made it harder for married households than for single-parent households to get benefits. Although few couples sit down and calculate the possible economic effects of getting married, there is a sense, especially within low-income communities, that getting married means you lose “stuff.” Couples may not be able to calculate exactly how much “stuff” they stand to lose, but they know marriage, at least financially, is a bad deal." - https://www.brookings.edu/articles/weddi...re-reform/


Since studies have shown that substance abuse is twice as likely in single-parent kids, the incentive to single-parenthood also contributes heavily to substance abuse:
"Then out comes a study from Sweden - the biggest, most convincing ever done on the subject - that says children in one-parent homes are twice as likely as those in two-parent families to develop serious psychiatric problems and addictions later in life." - https://www.cbsnews.com/news/single-pare...e-at-risk/


And as already shown, from the Brookings Institute, single-parenthood, joblessness, and lack of high school graduation are the three primary contributors to poverty. As far as crime:
"The bottom line is that there is a large body of literature showing that children of single mothers are more likely to commit crimes than children who grow up with their married parents. This is true not just in the United States, but wherever the issue has been researched." - https://www.theatlantic.com/sexes/archiv...me/265860/


So as any rational, intellectually honest person can see, you are only making ad hoc arguments, at best, while I am making a wholly consistent explanation for ALL the factors. My argument explains the causes of everything you mention. "...self-evidently bad things" is a trivial tautology with no explanatory power whatsoever unless you can show some etiology.

(Nov 19, 2017 05:47 PM)Magical Realist Wrote:

(Nov 19, 2017 04:29 PM)Yazata Wrote: I think that in many cases the idea of 'privilege' is a thin cover for today's socially-acceptable and often mandatory left-racism. It's the assertion that members of hated groups (typically white Anglos) are recipients of unfair advantage and must be made the target of discrimination, just to even things out so to speak.

Too often it's a rationalization for racial and ethnic prejudice, hatred, resentment and discrimination. People get labeled as recipients of privilege simply on account of the color of their skin. So a white kid who comes from a poor disfunctional family, who got bullied in high school, ends up being denounced as 'privileged' by the smug comfortable university academics, people with no knowledge of or even any interest in his life circumstances.

He just has the wrong sex and skin color.

White privilege isn't an attempt at reverse discrimination. It's the simple observation that if a black kid can be discriminated against based on his skin color, then a white kid can be favored because of his skin color. It's not saying he is an inferior race as racism assumes. It's saying that being white comes with it's own perks in our society. It goes hand in hand with racism. If a black kid is stereotyped as being more violent or lazy or stupid than a white kid, it follows that the white kid is being stereotyped as more benign or motivated or smart than the black kid. And that's a privileging based on white skin color.

A brief history of white privilege...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZN9mwhSrTdU

Decision privilege, of which any race can take advantage:
https://www.youtube-nocookie.com/embed/l5lnZeAGd3g

Quote:Although few couples sit down and calculate the possible economic effects of getting married,

Tks..that all I needed to know..

Hmmm..I wonder if all these conniving single black mothers looking to scam the welfare office out of a few bucks by staying single figure in the more lucrative financial benefits of having a two income family? Naww..they're black. They can't be that smart now can they?

(Nov 19, 2017 09:00 PM)Magical Realist Wrote:

Quote:Although few couples sit down and calculate the possible economic effects of getting married,

Tks..that all I needed to know..

Hmmm..I wonder if all these conniving single black mothers looking to scam the welfare office out of a few bucks by staying single figure the more lucrative financial benefits of having a two income family? Naww..they're black. They can't be that smart now can they?

Of course that's all you think you "need to know". You're a racist, only interested in continuing the same racist tokenism policies that destroyed black families and "keep them in their place" (thinking how you believe good blacks should). You're oblivious to the fact that YOU are the only one making assumptions like "conniving single black mothers". It's like a racist Freudian slip, with your vile subconscious bubbling up to say "barf" on a regular basis.