White Privilege

If you've never actually experienced institutionalized racism firsthand then classism would seem like the "larger issue" (pretty nebulous wording there anyway), but that doesn't mean it's true.

Mm. No, I agree with that idea. Classism does more than racism. That, and attacking classism does also attack racism.

Racism is its own thing now, though, and can and should be addressed separately.

Then again, you haven't experienced institutionalised racism either, have you, Flyboy?

(Neither have I, but I'd prefer not to make bold statements about which one's worse without first-hand experience).

Because imagination, empathy and education are not things humans are capable of.

But really, "institutionalized racism". It's not a statute (like affirmative action); it's not a guideline (like the sensitivity reviews for every textbook produced in the US); it's not an accepted social practice (like shaming white people for their race in college). It can hardly be said to be an institution at all. It's inertia. It's a leftover. And as long as you think that the three points I listed are totally acceptable because they're on behalf of the underdog, you are fomenting hatred, like it or not.

No, but I understand the concept in an academic sense, and am of the opinion that classism is both farther reaching and an aspect of racism in and of itself.

I think that Autumncomet sums it up nicely, the 'X privilege checklist' is a only really an effective -if perhaps self congratulatory- way of remind a Privileged Person who might scoff at minority issue X, that hey guess what, 'other people have got it different from you.

It does not mean that you are personal responsible for inequality. It doesn't even mean you should pretend to care. But it is however a useful thing to remember when dealing with people from other walks of life.

Classism may be the larger issues because it sets poor whites up against poor minorities, because the poor whites think, wrongly or rightly, that the burden of equalizing will fall on them and they're just barely scraping by as it is. Getting rid of this pressure on both poor whites and poor minorities would do a lot to get rid of racism.

edited 22nd Feb '12 6:54:33 AM by ohsointocats

Pretty much.

That too. Class-ism is probably easier to deal with (since it's easier to see) and eliminates most of two problems with one stone. At the very least, getting rid of classism gets rid of one headache.

I don't think the issue with racism is inertia as much as it is ignorance about people who are different (which in itself is probably the result of inertia)—this is natural and the only thing you can do about it as a person is seek out other people. But institutional racism/racial inertia definitely still exists. And trust me guys, ignoring it makes it worse.

And doing away with classism won't get rid of racism either. There are some stereotypes that don't apply to class or apply to minorities in the upper classes.

So just act with an open mind and make dumb jokes with your friends and hopefully in a few centuries this will sort itself out.

Because imagination, empathy and education are not things humans are capable of.

But really, "institutionalized racism". It's not a statute (like affirmative action); it's not a guideline (like the sensitivity reviews for every textbook produced in the US); it's not an accepted social practice (like shaming white people for their race in college). It can hardly be said to be an institution at all. It's inertia. It's a leftover. And as long as you think that the three points I listed are totally acceptable because they're on behalf of the underdog, you are fomenting hatred, like it or not.

OK, so there's quite a lot wrong with this post, but just to get us rolling... isn't saying that bias and sensitivity reviews foment hatred rather like saying that food safety regulations foment salmonella?

I don't understand what that last paragraph was supposed to mean... Can you explain it to an idiot like me?

Basically, Doma seems to be suggesting that regulating the contents of textbooks promotes racial hatred. Which seems pretty ass-backwards to me.

Warning, controversial opinion:

A lot of the aid to poor minorities in particular that does not go to poor whites sends the message that the poor whites that they somehow deserve the poverty, that it is somehow their fault, because the system is not working against them, and are therefore leery of giving up any seeming advantage they have— you may have noticed that this is the thing that Flyboy was talking about, intentional segregation of this class so as to keep them down.

However, if lower classes were actually in a comfortable enough position to take risks, everyone would be able to see the actual racism going on, and would be more willing to do something about it.

Again, not my fault if you don't listen to us.

This is what I meant because "just a plan would benefit you personally most doesn't mean it's the best plan."

You personally suffer from classism but not racism, so you want to fix classism and ignore*

You can't just generalize from your own experiences like that. You can't say "if the liberal elite would just listen to ME they'd get everything right!" Otherwise Mitt Romney (and his ilk) gets to ignore EVERYONE, because HE doesn't suffer classism OR racism.

People do tend to be better able to change when they don't think they're being attacked.

I think( as if my opinion mattered ) that the insinuation that some racism is okay (I.E. that against those deemed racist themselves) is part of the problem. It doesn't seem likely to change any time soon, but becoming accepting of any racism at all is simply disgusting.

For the record, I am a white male. I get sick and tired of the thoughts that I should be wary of what I say, it makes it uncomfortable to be around people from other races, simply because there is no way to predict what will end up being offensive. And when race does come up, I don't feel that I'm welcome in the discussion unless the other person can't see me.

edited 22nd Feb '12 10:49:52 AM by GlassPistol

For the record, I am a white male. I get sick and tired of the thoughts that I should be wary of what I say, it makes it uncomfortable to be around people from other races, simply because there is no way to predict what will end up being offensive. And when race does come up, I don't feel that I'm welcome in the discussion unless the other person can't see me.

See, I occasionally get like that, but then I remember - that's how a good number of them feel every day of their lives. It's quite sobering.

Understanding a problem doesn't make it feel better. Neither of us should have to feel that way.

[edit]"Neither" meaning myself and the other person, not me and you. Though you shouldn't have to feel like that either.

edited 22nd Feb '12 10:59:08 AM by GlassPistol

Right, but it's worth remembering that as the folks on top of the heap, equality will require a few sacrifices, and this isn't anywhere near as bad as what the genuinely disadvantaged are going through.

Point is, I'm not the one who requires either your sympathy or empathy.

I didn't think you did need it, I just didn't want to come off like an asshat. And yes, I do basically do agree with what you're saying. I'm just tired of racism in general, its very existence is a factor in how hard it is to stamp out.

I'll ask this again, why is this an either or an or?

Racism exists. We know this. It's backed up by personal anecdotes and statistics.

Counter-racism also exists. We know this. It's backed up by personal anecdotes and statistics *

"Counter-Racism" is not really backed up by statistics, though.

Classism is backed up by statistics but those statistics ALSO back me up when I say "racism is not reducible to classism".

I know you're trying hard to come to a compromise here, but frankly I don't really want to compromise. You remind me a great deal of those TV news networks that always try to present both sides of an issue equally no matter what they are or how silly that is.

And on that note:

edited 22nd Feb '12 1:19:54 PM by BlackHumor

I agree with you, obviously.

It's so much easier to oppress the masses under the doctrine of "divide and conquer." That is, after all, what racism in the US began as: an intricately organized method of stopping black slaves and white indentured servants slaves from cooperating in rebellions in colonial America.

As a liberal, I must say, I think you're actually referring to the relatively clueless moderate community.

Though that's what Americans refer to as "liberal."

Except it is, insofar as I've seen from most sociological conclusions.

And I don't see why you can't do both. I simply think that classism, and the fighting of classism, as well as things like wealth inequality, would do more to make things like affirmative action actually work.

All the affirmative action in the world isn't doing you any favors if you're still poor and oppressed as a wage slave.

As for "counter-" or "reverse-" racism, there is no such thing. There is simply racism, and anybody, minority or not, can be racism.

Institutionalized racism is another matter entirely, however.

And you Black Humor, remind me of those folks that seem to need to be right, regardless of any mitigating evidence.

I am not an appeaser, as you're trying to paint me. I'm a person that wants all the data before making a decision, and I try not to discount anything.

There are race-based scholarships available to minorities that are not available to white students of a similar background and/or academic achievement.

Rihanna uses the word bitch and 'ghetto' lingo in her songs, but the minute a Dutch magazine used the term to describe her, the editor was fired.

Complaints from a black coworker about racism from a white coworker will generate much more immediate action than a complaint from a white worker about a black coworker.

If any of these things happened once, then it counts as counter-racism. What is your staunch refusal to accept this?

Again, there is no such thing as "reverse" racism, or "counter" racism.

There is simply racism, which can be held as an attitude by anyone of any ethnicity and/or nationality.

The idea that minorities cannot be racist against majorities stems from an incorrect conflation of conventional individual racism and the societal-level concept of institutionalized racism, which are distinct and different in their fundamental aspects.

What he said.

Even if we got people over their stupid attachments to class or race, they would find something else to freak about like religion, sexuality, or physicality.

Humans self segregate in general. It's a survival mechanism that's evolved to a degree that is hard to eliminate. But if you want steps in aiding this or at least minimizing it's effects, you have to force the person to get out of their own attributes. That is a very hard and sometimes traumatizing thing for an individual to do. But considering I do it on a daily basis with other issues for a living, we as a country can step it up and push each other to better levels.