GolemIII said:

---

Thanks. Now I know Matt Chandler is a lying piece of dog s#|t and The Village 'church' is just a collection of other pieces of dog $#|t who are into virtue signaling to their leftist pals.

And 'gaslighting' is just the most recent inane leftist accusation when they can't handle facts. You are likely either jinx or cinque.

---

Yikes.

stargell_bello said:

---

I think comparing Soviet Russia or unrest in Africa to the simple idea that being a member of a majority can afford us certain comforts that those in the minority do not share is a false analogy.

---

You falsely believe that being a member of the majority affords people certain comforts.
This is not true. This does not analyze the individual at his level. It takes him and puts him into a group.

It's literally the exact same concept exercised in Soviet Russia and Africa today. The EXACT same thing.

It's simple human nature from the beginning of history that proves labeling people as beneficiaries will create discord and ultimately chaos.

And historically what has a ruling majority who ignores the needs, concerns, and plight of the non-majority looked like? I can't remember that from history class.

EDIT: I'm being glib, but there is a HUGE difference between acknowledging the different experiences of a minority and class politics. It's dishonest to call those two ideas the same thing.

stargell_bello said:

---

And historically what has a ruling majority who ignores the needs, concerns, and plight of the non-majority looked like? I can't remember that from history class.

---

Do you not see the assumptions that you're typing here?

Ruling majority (whites) ignore the needs of the non majority (non whites).

You are accusing an entire race of collectively being racist or indifferent to other races by the simple fact that they are the majority.

Example Problem: Whites have it easier in society.

The next step will be making life harder for whites whether you like it or not. This will be done through guilt, intimidation and maybe even violence.

Here is another example to fix white privilege:

Lets overlook all white resumes...we will only select minorities as to lend a helping hand to ending white privilege.

For those that can see through BS:

Just ask those that agree with white privilege about the actions they will now take by being aware of their white privilege.

The actions will follow a zero-sum game because the belief of white privilege follows a zero-sum game.

This means you will have to take down one group to benefit/improve the other.

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

And historically what has a ruling majority who ignores the needs, concerns, and plight of the non-majority looked like? I can't remember that from history class.

---

Do you not see the assumptions that you're typing here?

Ruling majority (whites) ignore the needs of the non majority (non whites).

You are accusing an entire race of collectively being racist or indifferent to other races by the simple fact that they are the majority.

Example Problem: Whites have it easier in society.

The next step will be making life harder for whites whether you like it or not. This will be done through guilt, intimidation and maybe even violence.

Here is another example to fix white privilege:

Lets overlook all white resumes...we will only select minorities as to lend a helping hand to ending white privilege.

---

I have called no one racist, the only person who has leveled that accusation has been you (at me).

Your only argument is a slippery slope fallacy. "IF we admit that there is an advantage to being the majority, THEN they will use that to force or guilt us into being at a disadvantage, THEN we won't be able to find jobs, THEN we will be the oppressed group. THEREFORE acknowledging we have a certain advantage is actually oppressive or 'racist' towards white people." This is all conjecture and only serves to muddy the issue. I am in no way claiming any of that.

Acknowledging that someone else might not experience the same exact life experiences as you is the only thing I have proposed at any point during this dialogue.

stargell_bello said:

---

GolemIII said:

---

Thanks. Now I know Matt Chandler is a lying piece of dog s#|t and The Village 'church' is just a collection of other pieces of dog $#|t who are into virtue signaling to their leftist pals.

And 'gaslighting' is just the most recent inane leftist accusation when they can't handle facts. You are likely either jinx or cinque.

---

Yikes.

---

Don't sweat it. It's just a natural part of ongoing on-line evolution for the poster sooner or later to be known as Golem IV.

stargell_bello said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

And historically what has a ruling majority who ignores the needs, concerns, and plight of the non-majority looked like? I can't remember that from history class.

---

Do you not see the assumptions that you're typing here?

Ruling majority (whites) ignore the needs of the non majority (non whites).

You are accusing an entire race of collectively being racist or indifferent to other races by the simple fact that they are the majority.

Example Problem: Whites have it easier in society.

The next step will be making life harder for whites whether you like it or not. This will be done through guilt, intimidation and maybe even violence.

Here is another example to fix white privilege:

Lets overlook all white resumes...we will only select minorities as to lend a helping hand to ending white privilege.

---

I have called no one racist, the only person who has leveled that accusation has been you (at me).

Your only argument is a slippery slope fallacy. "IF we admit that there is an advantage to being the majority, THEN they will use that to force or guilt us into being at a disadvantage, THEN we won't be able to find jobs, THEN we will be the oppressed group. THEREFORE acknowledging we have a certain advantage is actually oppressive or 'racist' towards white people." This is all conjecture and only serves to muddy the issue. I am in no way claiming any of that.

Acknowledging that someone else might not experience the same exact life experiences as you is the only thing I have proposed at any point during this dialogue.

---

First off, my premise isn't about you. It's about what society will do by accepting white privilege.

Second, what do you recommend me or even you do about your white privilege?

If the answer is 'nothing'. Then combating white privilege as a cause is pointless.

If your answer is to acknowledge someone might not experience the same experiences as me because I belong to a race that is slightly the majority. Then you're assuming my existence is a burden on those not like me.

If your answer is to put minorities before whites. Then my slippery slope is not a fallacy.

Here is a real time example I just found on Reddit:

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

And historically what has a ruling majority who ignores the needs, concerns, and plight of the non-majority looked like? I can't remember that from history class.

---

Do you not see the assumptions that you're typing here?

Ruling majority (whites) ignore the needs of the non majority (non whites).

You are accusing an entire race of collectively being racist or indifferent to other races by the simple fact that they are the majority.

Example Problem: Whites have it easier in society.

The next step will be making life harder for whites whether you like it or not. This will be done through guilt, intimidation and maybe even violence.

Here is another example to fix white privilege:

Lets overlook all white resumes...we will only select minorities as to lend a helping hand to ending white privilege.

---

I have called no one racist, the only person who has leveled that accusation has been you (at me).

Your only argument is a slippery slope fallacy. "IF we admit that there is an advantage to being the majority, THEN they will use that to force or guilt us into being at a disadvantage, THEN we won't be able to find jobs, THEN we will be the oppressed group. THEREFORE acknowledging we have a certain advantage is actually oppressive or 'racist' towards white people." This is all conjecture and only serves to muddy the issue. I am in no way claiming any of that.

Acknowledging that someone else might not experience the same exact life experiences as you is the only thing I have proposed at any point during this dialogue.

---

First off, my premise isn't about you. It's about what society will do by accepting white privilege.

Second, what do you recommend me or even you do about your white privilege?

If the answer is 'nothing'. Then combating white privilege as a cause is pointless.

If your answer is to acknowledge someone might not experience the same experiences as me . Then you're assuming my existence is a burden on those not like me.

If your answer is to put minorities before whites. Then my slippery slope is not a fallacy.

---

That's a great question, I'm glad you asked!!

If you are a man or woman who worships, maybe consider worshipping at a Church once a quarter that does so differently than you. Maybe they wear different clothes to Church, maybe they sing different songs, experience that with them! And then - take that back to your church. If we are going to take Jesus at his word then we should want our hometown church to reflect the diversity of the capital "C" Church! That might mean doing some things that you aren't used to in order to make people with different life experiences more comfortable. Maybe that means singing a Gospel song, or incorporating different instruments, or doing communion in a bit of a different style. Meet others halfway, instead of assuming your way of Church is the way it "should be done". It might be uncomfortable, but I'm sure the Lord will bless it!

In my opinion, the resolution to other issues will flow from that. As I believe The Church is Christ's vehicle for accomplishing what he set out to do when he said that he has come to makes all things new.

It is not a zero sum game. It is not class warfare. It's simply the way it ought to be. And we should be thankful for that - because when the Bible speaks of inclusion and diversity and bringing the Gospel to the ends of the earth.. it's talking about us. We are the ends of the earth.

stargell_bello said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

And historically what has a ruling majority who ignores the needs, concerns, and plight of the non-majority looked like? I can't remember that from history class.

---

Do you not see the assumptions that you're typing here?

Ruling majority (whites) ignore the needs of the non majority (non whites).

You are accusing an entire race of collectively being racist or indifferent to other races by the simple fact that they are the majority.

Example Problem: Whites have it easier in society.

The next step will be making life harder for whites whether you like it or not. This will be done through guilt, intimidation and maybe even violence.

Here is another example to fix white privilege:

Lets overlook all white resumes...we will only select minorities as to lend a helping hand to ending white privilege.

---

I have called no one racist, the only person who has leveled that accusation has been you (at me).

Your only argument is a slippery slope fallacy. "IF we admit that there is an advantage to being the majority, THEN they will use that to force or guilt us into being at a disadvantage, THEN we won't be able to find jobs, THEN we will be the oppressed group. THEREFORE acknowledging we have a certain advantage is actually oppressive or 'racist' towards white people." This is all conjecture and only serves to muddy the issue. I am in no way claiming any of that.

Acknowledging that someone else might not experience the same exact life experiences as you is the only thing I have proposed at any point during this dialogue.

---

First off, my premise isn't about you. It's about what society will do by accepting white privilege.

Second, what do you recommend me or even you do about your white privilege?

If the answer is 'nothing'. Then combating white privilege as a cause is pointless.

If your answer is to acknowledge someone might not experience the same experiences as me . Then you're assuming my existence is a burden on those not like me.

If your answer is to put minorities before whites. Then my slippery slope is not a fallacy.

---

That's a great question, I'm glad you asked!!

If you are a man or woman who worships, maybe consider worshipping at a Church once a quarter that does so differently than you. Maybe they wear different clothes to Church, maybe they sing different songs, experience that with them! And then - take that back to your church. If we are going to take Jesus at his word then we should want our hometown church to reflect the diversity of the capital "C" Church! That might mean doing some things that you aren't used to in order to make people with different life experiences more comfortable. Maybe that means singing a Gospel song, or incorporating different instruments, or doing communion in a bit of a different style. Meet others halfway, instead of assuming your way of Church is the way it "should be done". It might be uncomfortable, but I'm sure the Lord will bless it!

In my opinion, the resolution to other issues will flow from that. As I believe The Church is Christ's vehicle for accomplishing what he set out to do when he said that he has come to makes all things new.

It is not a zero sum game. It is not class warfare. It's simply the way it ought to be. And we should be thankful for that - because when the Bible speaks of inclusion and diversity and bringing the Gospel to the ends of the earth.. it's talking about us. We are the ends of the earth.

---

You said I might need to do this:

Quote:

---

That might mean doing some things that you aren't used to in order to make people with different life experiences more comfortable.

---

How can I do that when white privilege rhetoric causes this?:

BLACK LIVES MATTER PHILLY BANS WHITE PEOPLE FROM ITS MEETINGS
http://dailycaller.com/2017/04/03/black-lives-matter-philly-bans-white-people-from-its-meetings/

Or this?

From the James Damore filing. "Cheesy White Males" are not allowed to speak at conferences. This was approved by Google HR.



Or what is this student supposed to do?

Evergreen Student: 'I've been told I'm not allowed to speak because I'm white'

or this?


Are you concerned at all about this type of rhetoric? Are you even aware of it?







What I'm trying to tell you is that it's not following the path you want it to.

stargell_bello said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

Okay I'll bite.

If you disagree with me, maybe this quote from a sermon that Matt Chandler (Pastor of The Village Church) gave after the events in Ferguson can explain my point better than I. I think this quote rebuts your first argument well.

"The challenge with white privilege is that most white people cannot see it. We assume that the experiences and opportunities afforded to us are the same afforded to others. Sadly, this simply isn't true. Privileged people can fall into the trap of universalizing experiences and laying them across other people's experiences as an interpretive lens What is so deceptive about white privilege is that it is different from blatant racism or bias. A privileged person's heart may be free from racist thoughts or biased attitudes, but may still fail to see how the very privilege afforded to him or her shapes how he or she interprets and understands the situations and circumstances of people without privilege."

Pretty interesting. Claiming white privilege exists doesn't mean I'm racist. It doesn't mean you're racist. It simply means that just because we have never been affected by something, doesn't mean that everyone else has been unaffected in the exact same way. It's acknowledging that others might experience something that we have a bit of a blind spot to.

I don't think your claim that the racism of today is a direct result of postmodernity holds water. That is an argument that I have seen Glenn Beck (among others) make but I simply don't think that's a fair charge. Race in America has a very specific history, and to blame any type of strife we find today on a post-WW2 ideological movement seems flippant. I'm certain that we can agree that over the course of history, and certainly over the past 500 years or so of "modernity", of which post-modernity is a direct response to, MLK and the Civil Rights movement occurred very very recently, so to assume that the problems that may have existed before the Civil Rights movement and certainly existed for the majority of the European experience in North America only exist now because of a relatively recent movement seems to be discounting the context of a greater issue.

I make this argument as a political conservative, as a comfortable American with white skin, not because of any political or racial affiliation, but simply because I think that the heart of Jesus was for the "other", on earth he considered the plight of the other first and foremost, and so in our pursuit of Christ-likeness it is in our best interest to do so as well.

---

Oh look another long winded post that in the end is trash.

I will ask the same question I asked at the beginning of the thread and no one has been able to answer.

Where is the privilege for a white person on welfare?

And please try to respond with evidence- not some sermon given by a pastor that says nothing and is just full of opinion.

And limit your post to like 50 words or less since it is clear after 10 words of your post that it is full of crap.

---

It is clear from your previous posts on this thread and others like it that your mind is and has been very much made up. You were not who my posts on this thread were at any point directed towards. I think it's possible to have civil discourse on this topic without dissolving into name-calling and gaslighting, but alas.

---

Translation--- you have no examples and have to lie.

I have called you no names. I have called no one names on this thread. I have had civil discussion with them. I am still waiting for someone to provide evidence. IF you or anyone else had some you would provide it instead of deflecting and running away to hide.

stargell_bello said:

---

I think comparing Soviet Russia or unrest in Africa to the simple idea that being a member of a majority can afford us certain comforts that those in the minority do not share is a false analogy.

---

How is a member of the majority who is on welfare getting any sort of privilege?

stargell_bello said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

Okay I'll bite.

If you disagree with me, maybe this quote from a sermon that Matt Chandler (Pastor of The Village Church) gave after the events in Ferguson can explain my point better than I. I think this quote rebuts your first argument well.

"The challenge with white privilege is that most white people cannot see it. We assume that the experiences and opportunities afforded to us are the same afforded to others. Sadly, this simply isn't true. Privileged people can fall into the trap of universalizing experiences and laying them across other people's experiences as an interpretive lens What is so deceptive about white privilege is that it is different from blatant racism or bias. A privileged person's heart may be free from racist thoughts or biased attitudes, but may still fail to see how the very privilege afforded to him or her shapes how he or she interprets and understands the situations and circumstances of people without privilege."

Pretty interesting. Claiming white privilege exists doesn't mean I'm racist. It doesn't mean you're racist. It simply means that just because we have never been affected by something, doesn't mean that everyone else has been unaffected in the exact same way. It's acknowledging that others might experience something that we have a bit of a blind spot to.

I don't think your claim that the racism of today is a direct result of postmodernity holds water. That is an argument that I have seen Glenn Beck (among others) make but I simply don't think that's a fair charge. Race in America has a very specific history, and to blame any type of strife we find today on a post-WW2 ideological movement seems flippant. I'm certain that we can agree that over the course of history, and certainly over the past 500 years or so of "modernity", of which post-modernity is a direct response to, MLK and the Civil Rights movement occurred very very recently, so to assume that the problems that may have existed before the Civil Rights movement and certainly existed for the majority of the European experience in North America only exist now because of a relatively recent movement seems to be discounting the context of a greater issue.

I make this argument as a political conservative, as a comfortable American with white skin, not because of any political or racial affiliation, but simply because I think that the heart of Jesus was for the "other", on earth he considered the plight of the other first and foremost, and so in our pursuit of Christ-likeness it is in our best interest to do so as well.

---

Privilege = You or your ancestors did not earn the rights you have today.
You're applying this to an entire race of people.

The idea that you can target an entire ethnic group with a "crime" for existing is absolutely abhorrent.

Pushing the term white privilege makes non whites believe that ALL whites are getting a one up in life:
The movement beyond that is to punish, demonize and make life harder for whites: that's how this ends.

It may not be how you want it to end...but it's what human nature leads to.

and history proves it. Soviet communists who exercised this EXACT line of thinking towards Kulaks (farmers). These collectivists (same types that push white privilege) killed, raped and robbed all the Kulaks because they insisted that because they showed signs of wealth that they were criminals and robbers.

You can say it's about being aware all you want...but demonizing whites is the reality of what is going to happen by pushing this.

Collectively held guilt at the level of the individual is dangerous: if you're looking to stir up trouble in, then keep pushing white privilege.

Eventually you as a white person will be looked down upon.
"you have no say in this conversation because you're white and can't possibly understand"
"you have a nice house only because you're white and not because you worked hard"
"Your existence is making me uncomfortable, can you please leave the room".

You want this?

---

Whew, a lot of mischaracterization in this post. I count 3, maybe 4 straw men. I expected a bit more banter before being accused of being a Communist

---

I see 47 decided to get a new SN to continue this thread.

stargell_bello said:

---

And historically what has a ruling majority who ignores the needs, concerns, and plight of the non-majority looked like? I can't remember that from history class.

EDIT: I'm being glib, but there is a HUGE difference between acknowledging the different experiences of a minority and class politics. It's dishonest to call those two ideas the same thing.

---

Except that in the USSR the classes were often made up of a specific ethnicity in various areas. Many of the purges and "relocations" were done so to specifically target specific ethnic groups. Like after WW2 when the soviets moved all the Finns from the captured territory to other areas. Or the large number of Asians moved from central Asia (the Stans today) to other areas of the USSR, or Stalin's purges of Jews.

stargell_bello said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

And historically what has a ruling majority who ignores the needs, concerns, and plight of the non-majority looked like? I can't remember that from history class.

---

Do you not see the assumptions that you're typing here?

Ruling majority (whites) ignore the needs of the non majority (non whites).

You are accusing an entire race of collectively being racist or indifferent to other races by the simple fact that they are the majority.

Example Problem: Whites have it easier in society.

The next step will be making life harder for whites whether you like it or not. This will be done through guilt, intimidation and maybe even violence.

Here is another example to fix white privilege:

Lets overlook all white resumes...we will only select minorities as to lend a helping hand to ending white privilege.

---

I have called no one racist, the only person who has leveled that accusation has been you (at me).

Your only argument is a slippery slope fallacy. "IF we admit that there is an advantage to being the majority, THEN they will use that to force or guilt us into being at a disadvantage, THEN we won't be able to find jobs, THEN we will be the oppressed group. THEREFORE acknowledging we have a certain advantage is actually oppressive or 'racist' towards white people." This is all conjecture and only serves to muddy the issue. I am in no way claiming any of that.

Acknowledging that someone else might not experience the same exact life experiences as you is the only thing I have proposed at any point during this dialogue.

---

What advantage? Please provide specific, documented evidence.

stargell_bello said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

And historically what has a ruling majority who ignores the needs, concerns, and plight of the non-majority looked like? I can't remember that from history class.

---

Do you not see the assumptions that you're typing here?

Ruling majority (whites) ignore the needs of the non majority (non whites).

You are accusing an entire race of collectively being racist or indifferent to other races by the simple fact that they are the majority.

Example Problem: Whites have it easier in society.

The next step will be making life harder for whites whether you like it or not. This will be done through guilt, intimidation and maybe even violence.

Here is another example to fix white privilege:

Lets overlook all white resumes...we will only select minorities as to lend a helping hand to ending white privilege.

---

I have called no one racist, the only person who has leveled that accusation has been you (at me).

Your only argument is a slippery slope fallacy. "IF we admit that there is an advantage to being the majority, THEN they will use that to force or guilt us into being at a disadvantage, THEN we won't be able to find jobs, THEN we will be the oppressed group. THEREFORE acknowledging we have a certain advantage is actually oppressive or 'racist' towards white people." This is all conjecture and only serves to muddy the issue. I am in no way claiming any of that.

Acknowledging that someone else might not experience the same exact life experiences as you is the only thing I have proposed at any point during this dialogue.

---

First off, my premise isn't about you. It's about what society will do by accepting white privilege.

Second, what do you recommend me or even you do about your white privilege?

If the answer is 'nothing'. Then combating white privilege as a cause is pointless.

If your answer is to acknowledge someone might not experience the same experiences as me . Then you're assuming my existence is a burden on those not like me.

If your answer is to put minorities before whites. Then my slippery slope is not a fallacy.

---

That's a great question, I'm glad you asked!!

If you are a man or woman who worships, maybe consider worshipping at a Church once a quarter that does so differently than you. Maybe they wear different clothes to Church, maybe they sing different songs, experience that with them! And then - take that back to your church. If we are going to take Jesus at his word then we should want our hometown church to reflect the diversity of the capital "C" Church! That might mean doing some things that you aren't used to in order to make people with different life experiences more comfortable. Maybe that means singing a Gospel song, or incorporating different instruments, or doing communion in a bit of a different style. Meet others halfway, instead of assuming your way of Church is the way it "should be done". It might be uncomfortable, but I'm sure the Lord will bless it!

In my opinion, the resolution to other issues will flow from that. As I believe The Church is Christ's vehicle for accomplishing what he set out to do when he said that he has come to makes all things new.

It is not a zero sum game. It is not class warfare. It's simply the way it ought to be. And we should be thankful for that - because when the Bible speaks of inclusion and diversity and bringing the Gospel to the ends of the earth.. it's talking about us. We are the ends of the earth.

---

So you have zero answers... got it.

cowboycwr said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

Okay I'll bite.

If you disagree with me, maybe this quote from a sermon that Matt Chandler (Pastor of The Village Church) gave after the events in Ferguson can explain my point better than I. I think this quote rebuts your first argument well.

"The challenge with white privilege is that most white people cannot see it. We assume that the experiences and opportunities afforded to us are the same afforded to others. Sadly, this simply isn't true. Privileged people can fall into the trap of universalizing experiences and laying them across other people's experiences as an interpretive lens What is so deceptive about white privilege is that it is different from blatant racism or bias. A privileged person's heart may be free from racist thoughts or biased attitudes, but may still fail to see how the very privilege afforded to him or her shapes how he or she interprets and understands the situations and circumstances of people without privilege."

Pretty interesting. Claiming white privilege exists doesn't mean I'm racist. It doesn't mean you're racist. It simply means that just because we have never been affected by something, doesn't mean that everyone else has been unaffected in the exact same way. It's acknowledging that others might experience something that we have a bit of a blind spot to.

I don't think your claim that the racism of today is a direct result of postmodernity holds water. That is an argument that I have seen Glenn Beck (among others) make but I simply don't think that's a fair charge. Race in America has a very specific history, and to blame any type of strife we find today on a post-WW2 ideological movement seems flippant. I'm certain that we can agree that over the course of history, and certainly over the past 500 years or so of "modernity", of which post-modernity is a direct response to, MLK and the Civil Rights movement occurred very very recently, so to assume that the problems that may have existed before the Civil Rights movement and certainly existed for the majority of the European experience in North America only exist now because of a relatively recent movement seems to be discounting the context of a greater issue.

I make this argument as a political conservative, as a comfortable American with white skin, not because of any political or racial affiliation, but simply because I think that the heart of Jesus was for the "other", on earth he considered the plight of the other first and foremost, and so in our pursuit of Christ-likeness it is in our best interest to do so as well.

---

Privilege = You or your ancestors did not earn the rights you have today.
You're applying this to an entire race of people.

The idea that you can target an entire ethnic group with a "crime" for existing is absolutely abhorrent.

Pushing the term white privilege makes non whites believe that ALL whites are getting a one up in life:
The movement beyond that is to punish, demonize and make life harder for whites: that's how this ends.

It may not be how you want it to end...but it's what human nature leads to.

and history proves it. Soviet communists who exercised this EXACT line of thinking towards Kulaks (farmers). These collectivists (same types that push white privilege) killed, raped and robbed all the Kulaks because they insisted that because they showed signs of wealth that they were criminals and robbers.

You can say it's about being aware all you want...but demonizing whites is the reality of what is going to happen by pushing this.

Collectively held guilt at the level of the individual is dangerous: if you're looking to stir up trouble in, then keep pushing white privilege.

Eventually you as a white person will be looked down upon.
"you have no say in this conversation because you're white and can't possibly understand"
"you have a nice house only because you're white and not because you worked hard"
"Your existence is making me uncomfortable, can you please leave the room".

You want this?

---

Whew, a lot of mischaracterization in this post. I count 3, maybe 4 straw men. I expected a bit more banter before being accused of being a Communist

---

I see 47 decided to get a new SN to continue this thread.

---

Lucky us

Another idiot Waco47 type

Geez

Florda_mike said:

---

cowboycwr said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

stargell_bello said:

---

Okay I'll bite.

If you disagree with me, maybe this quote from a sermon that Matt Chandler (Pastor of The Village Church) gave after the events in Ferguson can explain my point better than I. I think this quote rebuts your first argument well.

"The challenge with white privilege is that most white people cannot see it. We assume that the experiences and opportunities afforded to us are the same afforded to others. Sadly, this simply isn't true. Privileged people can fall into the trap of universalizing experiences and laying them across other people's experiences as an interpretive lens What is so deceptive about white privilege is that it is different from blatant racism or bias. A privileged person's heart may be free from racist thoughts or biased attitudes, but may still fail to see how the very privilege afforded to him or her shapes how he or she interprets and understands the situations and circumstances of people without privilege."

Pretty interesting. Claiming white privilege exists doesn't mean I'm racist. It doesn't mean you're racist. It simply means that just because we have never been affected by something, doesn't mean that everyone else has been unaffected in the exact same way. It's acknowledging that others might experience something that we have a bit of a blind spot to.

I don't think your claim that the racism of today is a direct result of postmodernity holds water. That is an argument that I have seen Glenn Beck (among others) make but I simply don't think that's a fair charge. Race in America has a very specific history, and to blame any type of strife we find today on a post-WW2 ideological movement seems flippant. I'm certain that we can agree that over the course of history, and certainly over the past 500 years or so of "modernity", of which post-modernity is a direct response to, MLK and the Civil Rights movement occurred very very recently, so to assume that the problems that may have existed before the Civil Rights movement and certainly existed for the majority of the European experience in North America only exist now because of a relatively recent movement seems to be discounting the context of a greater issue.

I make this argument as a political conservative, as a comfortable American with white skin, not because of any political or racial affiliation, but simply because I think that the heart of Jesus was for the "other", on earth he considered the plight of the other first and foremost, and so in our pursuit of Christ-likeness it is in our best interest to do so as well.

---

Privilege = You or your ancestors did not earn the rights you have today.
You're applying this to an entire race of people.

The idea that you can target an entire ethnic group with a "crime" for existing is absolutely abhorrent.

Pushing the term white privilege makes non whites believe that ALL whites are getting a one up in life:
The movement beyond that is to punish, demonize and make life harder for whites: that's how this ends.

It may not be how you want it to end...but it's what human nature leads to.

and history proves it. Soviet communists who exercised this EXACT line of thinking towards Kulaks (farmers). These collectivists (same types that push white privilege) killed, raped and robbed all the Kulaks because they insisted that because they showed signs of wealth that they were criminals and robbers.

You can say it's about being aware all you want...but demonizing whites is the reality of what is going to happen by pushing this.

Collectively held guilt at the level of the individual is dangerous: if you're looking to stir up trouble in, then keep pushing white privilege.

Eventually you as a white person will be looked down upon.
"you have no say in this conversation because you're white and can't possibly understand"
"you have a nice house only because you're white and not because you worked hard"
"Your existence is making me uncomfortable, can you please leave the room".

You want this?

---

Whew, a lot of mischaracterization in this post. I count 3, maybe 4 straw men. I expected a bit more banter before being accused of being a Communist

---

I see 47 decided to get a new SN to continue this thread.

---

Lucky us

Another idiot Waco47 type

Geez

---

Cheer up my friend. This village can handle more than one idiot...cowboycwr has them well in hand.

17 pages and no one explains white privilege other than your skin is white...no one refutes Shapiro or Dinesh and no one explains how affirmative action is not considered non-white privilege.

fadskier said:

---

17 pages and no one explains white privilege other than your skin is white...no one refutes Shapiro or Dinesh and no one explains how affirmative action is not considered non-white privilege.

---

Amen brother

fadskier said:

---

17 pages and no one explains white privilege other than your skin is white...no one refutes Shapiro or Dinesh and no one explains how affirmative action is not considered non-white privilege.

---

Silence of the Crickets.

RioRata said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

After your homework maybe you'll get WP.

---

I want me some White Privilege but I don't like homework. Isn't there some place I can sign up and it is simply handed to me?

---

Are you white? Then yo already got "me some white privilege" but too dismissive to know it.

Stargell shows up, drops a few posts using 47 terms, makes some claims, is called out on them and disappears.....

fadskier said:

---

17 pages and no one explains white privilege other than your skin is white...no one refutes Shapiro or Dinesh and no one explains how affirmative action is not considered non-white privilege.

---

. Well that's it. White privilege is white skin. I don't have to explain anything about affirmative action. That's your definition. You defend it (non-white privilege?).

The reason I bowed out is because everyone on this thread has already made up their mind - in each direction. No need to bash our heads against a wall unnecessarily. Why fruitlessly argue? There are better ways to spend our time. Sic em!

stargell_bello said:

---

The reason I bowed out is because everyone on this thread has already made up their mind - in each direction. No need to bash our heads against a wall unnecessarily. Why fruitlessly argue? There are better ways to spend our time. Sic em!

---

PBS Host Lindsay Ellis: 'I Get Really Excited About White Genocide'

Waco1947 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

17 pages and no one explains white privilege other than your skin is white...no one refutes Shapiro or Dinesh and no one explains how affirmative action is not considered non-white privilege.

---

. Well that's it. White privilege is white skin. I don't have to explain anything about affirmative action. That's your definition. You defend it (non-white privilege?).

---

Except that goes against the definition of the word privilege.

stargell_bello said:

---

The reason I bowed out is because everyone on this thread has already made up their mind - in each direction. No need to bash our heads against a wall unnecessarily. Why fruitlessly argue? There are better ways to spend our time. Sic em!

---

In other words you have no evidence.

I am open to listening. I am just waiting for someone, anyone to provide even one shred of evidence.

Like starting with answering the question I have had since the beginning. Where is the privilege of a white person on welfare?

Doc Holliday said:

---

PBS Host Lindsay Ellis: 'I Get Really Excited About White Genocide'

---

And still has a job.


A guy said the N word and he loses his job. Even if it was said years ago.....

cowboycwr said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

PBS Host Lindsay Ellis: 'I Get Really Excited About White Genocide'

---

And still has a job.


A guy said the N word and he loses his job. Even if it was said years ago.....

---

Yeah! It's unreal.

cowboycwr said:

---

Doc Holliday said:

---

PBS Host Lindsay Ellis: 'I Get Really Excited About White Genocide'

---

And still has a job.


A guy said the N word and he loses his job. Even if it was said years ago.....

---

From obama the great divider

Waco1947 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

17 pages and no one explains white privilege other than your skin is white...no one refutes Shapiro or Dinesh and no one explains how affirmative action is not considered non-white privilege.

---

. Well that's it. White privilege is white skin. I don't have to explain anything about affirmative action. That's your definition. You defend it (non-white privilege?).

---

People of color getting job or accepted to college based on skin color not qualifications.

fadskier said:

---

Waco1947 said:

---

fadskier said:

---

17 pages and no one explains white privilege other than your skin is white...no one refutes Shapiro or Dinesh and no one explains how affirmative action is not considered non-white privilege.

---

. Well that's it. White privilege is white skin. I don't have to explain anything about affirmative action. That's your definition. You defend it (non-white privilege?).

---

People of color getting job or accepted to college based on skin color not qualifications.

---

Why do you care? You're not white.