The history white people need to learn

[fishonjazz]

I'm very proud of the actions of long dead people who lived in a culture that eventually evolved into the completely different culture I was incidentally born into.

I like this one too

 

[BYE]

First let's not confuse modern black pride and gay pride. It is legal for me to marry a black woman but it is illegal for me to marry a man of any color. There is no evidence that blacks as a group(a group that black pride is intent on emphasizing) exemplify greater support for gay rights. In fact if we are to believe public opinion polls the opposite is true.

Black pride clearly is about pride. Listen to the rhetoric. Terms like "the white man" are pervasive. Black pride is not addressing a set of higher humanist ideals that apply to all people. It is a singling out. A base urge akin to nationalism whereby people choose to embrace the pride of a constructed group.

Take the word ******. There was a time when the re appropriation of the n word was justifiable. Now the only people that openly use the word are black. A word that is arguably the most offensive word anyone can think of is now used by millions to self identify. A word that has not lost the connotations of slavery, segregation, and racism. ****** is offensive no matter who utters it. It is offensive to humankind.

You think I should kowtow and accept racial derision and devision in 2014? You think I should define myself as "the white man" or a "cracker *** bitch"?

When someone is treated unjustly because of the color of their skin(or sexual orientation, ethnicity, sex, etc.) I will stand by them not for some antiquated notion of pride or some hipster idea of solidarity. I will do it of the idea of personal honor and responsibility that all people have to uphold justice and equitability.

Sooner or later the race baiting has got to stop.

I more or less agree with your line of thinking in that the very category which someone who is "black" or otherwise utilizes to give themselves solidarity is the one that was decided for them through the devised term "white" and thus "black". By keeping the language of "black" you keep "white" and thus the baggage and antithesis. The problem is that there are real infringements on the rights of a given human being who is considered "black" (as a lesser human) by those "whites" that are in positions of power. How do you protect these people "blacks" and their rights without using the parlance of the historical dichotomy, i.e., "black" and "white"? The solution in my eyes is to try and lump this inequality and oppression into one category of general human inequality and injustice. The logistics of this from a governmental perspective are difficult, but you can do it at a personal level quite easily.

 

[moevillini]

Yep.

I tend to think that they were thought of as white 100 years ago as well though..... maybe poor white, or immigrant white, but white none the less.

The arcticle seems to be saying, and I'm simplifying, that white means well off or powerful.
I tend to think that poor, white, underprivileged people have always existed and have been considered white

according to the arcticle it seems that 100+ years ago, white = rich and powerful
So does that mean that wealthy and powerful africans, asians, arabs, etc were considered to be white back then? Interesting

Maybe my reading comprehension sucks. I read the article and thought she was saying that the term white was created as a label for the rich and powerful.

Maybe you can better tell me what she is trying to say in the article

But were they considered white in their time? For example, did they suffer from Jim Crow like blacks did? Did they have to use superstar drinking fountains? Did their children go to separate public schools?

eh, here's my take on at least the first part of the article:

White did not have to have any sort of meaning until non-whites began to have power. Thus, the immigrants of the 1800's and very early 1900's were not considered "white" because there was no real reason to differentiate them based on color - - blacks had none anyhow. So the discrimination was based more on the way they dressed, the way they spoke, their personal and religious customs and other things that would differentiate various nationalities and ethnic groups.

anyhow, that's all the deep thinking I have time for at the moment

 

[One Brow]

First let's not confuse modern black pride and gay pride. It is legal for me to marry a black woman but it is illegal for me to marry a man of any color. There is no evidence that blacks as a group(a group that black pride is intent on emphasizing) exemplify greater support for gay rights. In fact if we are to believe public opinion polls the opposite is true.

It's not confusing them to note that they have common elements.

Black pride clearly is about pride. Listen to the rhetoric. Terms like "the white man" are pervasive. Black pride is not addressing a set of higher humanist ideals that apply to all people. It is a singling out. A base urge akin to nationalism whereby people choose to embrace the pride of a constructed group.

I have listened to the rhetoric. I learned to listen without feeling the need to defend myself and my position in society, and doing so allowed me to see past the guilt I was imposing onto the rhetoric.

If you think term like "straight people" are not pervasive in discussion of gay pride, then it's really hard to take anything you have to say on the subject seriously.

Finally, of course it is about pride, in the sense that pride (the willingness to be open about who you are) is in some ways the opposite of shame (hiding who you are). It's just not about the type of pride you described earlier.

Take the word ******.

Y0u could make similarly true statements about ***, but you choose not to. Why?

You think I should kowtow and accept racial derision and devision in 2014? You think I should define myself as "the white man" or a "cracker *** bitch"?

I think you should acknowledge the benefit you have received from an identity that you had nothing to do with constructing, and note how your words can serve to either combat or reinforce this identity.

Sooner or later the race baiting has got to stop.

Sooner or later white people will stop blaming black people for how white people treat black people.

 

[One Brow]

according to the arcticle it seems that 100+ years ago, white = rich and powerful
So does that mean that wealthy and powerful africans, asians, arabs, etc were considered to be white back then? Interesting

100+ years ago the poor person of English/Scot/Welsh/German/etc. were considered worth of chances to prove themselves, to advance socially, to be managers, to be given loans for businesses, to be army officers, etc. The Irish and Serbians were fit to be foremen, police, etc., but not in the upper levels of management. Black people would only be bosses of other black people.

 

[One Brow]

But were they considered white in their time? For example, did they suffer from Jim Crow like blacks did? Did they have to use superstar drinking fountains? Did their children go to separate public schools?

They were more of a light gray than white. White enough for some things, but not others.

 

[fishonjazz]

100+ years ago the poor person of English/Scot/Welsh/German/etc. were considered worth of chances to prove themselves, to advance socially, to be managers, to be given loans for businesses, to be army officers, etc. The Irish and Serbians were fit to be foremen, police, etc., but not in the upper levels of management. Black people would only be bosses of other black people.

Was this true worldwide? or just in the U.S.

 

[moevillini]

They were more of a light gray than white. White enough for some things, but not others.

LOL!

Please post a photo of someone you would consider to be "light gray" in skin tone.

 

[TroutBum]

It's a tough and touchy time to be old and white in America. Changing demographics will inevitably end the electoral relevance of the Southern Strategy; 2016 truly is the last stand and shock and confusion will reign as Republicans realize they are Custer. If a Democrat wins in 2016 the Republican Party will implode.

One can only hope. Not because I love Democrats, but because I really hate what the Republican Party represents. That is, what I believe it represents.

You are allowed to think that, and you are allowed to choose to be wrong. If you go back about 120 years, you'll find drawings illustrating the supposedly ape-like features of the Irish, essays on their low character, etc.

If you go back 120 minutes, the Googles can show you essays, blog posts, and opinions about what worthless bags of dump white people are too. Because it's on the webz, or in your case, print, then it must be true.

Sooner or later white people will stop blaming black people for how white people treat black people.

Sooner or later black people will stop blaming white people for how long dead people treated other long dead people.











I'm not going to hold my breath.

 

[moevillini]

...Sooner or later black people will stop blaming white people for how long dead people treated other long dead people.





I'm not going to hold my breath.

Well that's a relief. Cause then you might turn blue, and we'd have to add that to the list of colors we discuss. I'd rather keep it a simple black and white discussion and leave the blues and grays out of this battle.

We fought that war 150 years ago anyway!

 

[♪alt13]

It's not confusing them to note that they have common elements.



I have listened to the rhetoric. I learned to listen without feeling the need to defend myself and my position in society, and doing so allowed me to see past the guilt I was imposing onto the rhetoric.

It seems that guilt is your prime motivator in matters of race. That fact that you think that you see past it is humorous to me.

If you think term like "straight people" are not pervasive in discussion of gay pride, then it's really hard to take anything you have to say on the subject seriously.

You surely understand the difference between the phrases "white People" and "the white man". I was involved in canvassing against prop 3(protection of marriage) and never once heard anyone say "the straight man". It is confusing the issue.

Finally, of course it is about pride, in the sense that pride (the willingness to be open about who you are) is in some ways the opposite of shame (hiding who you are). It's just not about the type of pride you described earlier.

I disagree and I stand by my previous argument.

Y0u could make similarly true statements about ***, but you choose not to. Why?

Cuz... I don't know what term you are referring to. Maybe I would make similar statements.

I think you should acknowledge the benefit you have received from an identity that you had nothing to do with constructing, and note how your words can serve to either combat or reinforce this identity.

You are the one imv that is reinforcing race based identity. I do my best to address it without reinforcing it. I have no problem confronting the reality of racial inequality and injustice without resorting to to the kind of rhetoric that you are so fond of. Rhetoric that more often than not serves to perpetuate a racially divided society.

Sooner or later white people will stop blaming black people for how white people treat black people.

Agreed, but it is an unfair characterization of my position/statements. I did not blame black people for the way they are treated by whites and I have made numerous posts on this board to the contrary. I simply hold black people accountable when they say some ridiculous ****. Just as I do when whites say some ridiculous ****.

 

[TroutBum]

Well that's a relief. Cause then you might turn blue, and we'd have to add that to the list of colors we discuss. I'd rather keep it a simple black and white discussion and leave the blues and grays out of this battle.

We fought that war 150 years ago anyway!

You're so damn cute I just wanna pinch your cheeks.