Quatermass
(?)Community Member
- Report Post
- Posted: Fri, 08 Mar 2013 05:37:37 +0000
Kaltros
Quatermass
Kaltros
Quatermass
I think I should go on a few points-
White Privilege is a thing, and white folk need to accept it. Accepting White Privilege is not the same as giving in to White Guilt. Because our fathers, grandfathers, ect. Had a better place in society than those of other races, we were able to inherit certain things. Better access to education, sometimes money. Many of us start out middle class. It's just a fact.
Our white ancestors had very little privilege at all. They built the United States from the ground up, and worked to pass on a better world to their children. Over enough generations, that produced what you call 'white privilege'. Do you have something against whites giving their children a world better than the one they found?
Wait, white folk built it? I thought the Native Americans were here, we stole it from them, then brought in a bunch of slave labor to ACTUALLY build it.
Same difference. If the whites hadn't colonized, they couldn't have brought slave labor either. Though in the north and the west slave labor was not as widespread anyhow.
Not the point. The point is that this land was not built by "White Settlers" who were "Unprivileged" . It was taken by natives, colonized by the wealthy first, and then populated by people who came in as indentured servants, who were basically slaves, who were exploited by the wealthy elites of the. Also, slaves. Still, with the exception of the servants and slaves, colonization was a rich man's game.
Quote:
Quote:
And no, there is nothing wrong with leaving a better world for the next generation. There is a problem, however, with denying that same thing to others. And that's the problem.
Who's denying anything to others? Inheritance isn't a gift you catch you catch out of the sky. It's something you build and work for for your children. Equal opportunity does not mean equal results.
Except when there is an inherent inequality that's built into a society that isn't being addressed, that is the problem.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
This is because of the segregated housing market. Government sponsored acts which were made with the intention of giving our soldiers a home after world war two had racial language that labelled blacks as being detrimental to a community, often times forcing them into smaller, lower income, communities.
You know, there might have been some truth in the claim that blacks were detrimental to the community. Look at Detroit, or Chicago, or New York City, or Seattle? Know who shows up in the criminal justice system more often than not? Far more often than their numbers in the general population would predict?
Of course, there is also truth to the fact that in many areas we had a segregated job market that had already created income inequality. The connection is economic class, not race. This is why, before hand, you could argue that the same information pointed to Irish and Italians as being a major source of crime. Because they lived in a lower social class as well.
When the prejudice between different groups of white ended, so did the violence attributed to those groups.
There are still plenty of lower-class whites around. But they seem to be less criminal on average than blacks and latinos. It's probably a better argument to look at marriage and illegitimacy rates. Blacks and latinos have lower rates of marriage and higher rates of illegitimacy, which leads to broken homes and psychological damage to children who are later more inclined to become criminals. Blacks currently have the worst illegitimacy rates of all.
There are lower class whites around, but far fewer, hence fewer crimes.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
After the racial language was removed, we had white flight. Racist and conniving real estate dealers playing off the fears of white people, making them sell their homes for less then market, so they can be resold. Jobs dried up. And all this is over, but it's an inherited problem. It becomes less of a problem every generation, but this ******** in the video needs to stop denying it.
White flight is pretty natural, if misguided. Sooner or later whites will run out of places to flee to.
Though it is an interesting assumption buried in that paragraph. Are whites integral to civilization? Is that why white flight is apparently wrong? Why can't the minorities pick up the slack after whites leave?
Simply put, you can't pick up slack that isn't there. If the businesses leave, there are no jobs. If there is nobody making a substantial amount of money in the neighbourhood, there are no businesses.
Chicagoans are all Americans, aren't they? Why don't they start their own businesses to fill in the gaps?
Lack of money, from this inherent inequality that I've been describing.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Also, there are benefits to diversity. It ENRICHES our culture. It's not just food and music, but rather, how they interact with others. I mean, I'm from Chicago. This is a hell of a city for diversity. We've created a unique culture for ourselves, based on the Polish, Irish, and Italian Immigrants, based on the African American Population that came, and the Puerto Ricans that were flown in to work slave labor jobs, who were just as soon forgotten.
And how about Chicago's horrendous gun violence despite having some of the strictest gun control laws around? That's one of the unmentioned benefits of diversity, I suppose. Not to mention other types of crime.
Don't pretend you know what the ******** is going on in Chicago. As I said, this is an economic problem. If there is no money, people find other ways to get it. It's also an issue of police. A bloody night in the Ghetto last summer meant more cops on the ******** Gold Coast.
Also, our Gun Violence comes mostly from Guns purchased legally in Indiana and brought over the border. It has nothing to do with strict- or lax- Gun Policies here. There is a high crime because there are few opportunities open to the people who need them the most.
Aren't there still poor whites in Chicago? Why don't poor whites commit crimes as often as blacks?
They do. There are, however, far few in the city of Chicago. Hence, lower crime rates.
Quote:
Quote:
Meanwhile, well, there is the lead issue- Lead Paint and lead runoff is poisoning people in communities where they can't afford to clean it up. This has actually been LINKED to violence in people, low test scores, ect. Besides being, well, poison. Poison the city isn't doing a damn thing about.
That's one factor, but does lead poisoning always lead to more violent behavior? Or is that a more sporadic effect of lead poisoning?
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/07/AR2007070701073.html
There you go.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
It's also a necessity. If one group has all the money, all the power, we have a problem. It needs to be shared, it needs to be spread, or else there isn't justice. Also, there just isn't enough Goddamn room.
If there's not enough goddamn room, how does it solve the problem cramming even more people together, people that are sometimes antagonistic to each other?
Nobody's cramming people together. Rather, we are learning to live with one another. Because we ******** have to.
That's not the wisest idea. racial/Ethnic tensions of people forced to live close together have ended in violence again and again in previous instances. Irish Catholics versus protestants, Tamils v. Sinhalese, Hindu v. Muslim, Black v. white africans in South Africa, Chinese/Japanese, and so on.
The idea of national self-determination of peoples was motivated in part by noticing the unending strife between different ethnic/linguistic/social groups in places like Austria-Hungary.
I think other people handled this issue, so I'm going to leave it alone.