What's new
By:
Filters

Privileged by Kyle Korver

More on that 2nd video, I wonder if @Jazz Spazz and some others still think I'm an idiot with no morals because I believe in voting opposite of my natural tendency to help bring moderation to party polarization.
 
Being born and raised in Norway, it is impossible for me to comprehend the race issues you guys face. I can try to understand it logically, but will never be able to feel it. As a 42 year old white man who has spent a lot of time in the US and being way more than moderately interested in your society, I can relate to other parts of Korver`s story, though. The opting out part seems very spot on to me. With you talk radio, Fox News and the rise of the internet and social media, way too many Americans have opted out of listening to opposing views. Rupert Murdoch made a fantastic business move with the way he created Fox News. For society though, it has been really, really bad. I might be wrong on this, but it seems to me like Americans in general take the easy way out and only listen to outlets that agree with their political views. This is very, very dangerous and is a recipe for disaster in the long run.

For those of you not agreeing on the tone of this debate and want to seek consensus, I think you are wrong. On cases like these, there is no consensus to be reached. The way to address these problems is for people to start educating themselves. I read Redstate and Breitbart not because I agree with the content, but because I think it is important to know how these people think. The "dialogue" today is more often about trying to make fun of the other side than actually discussing issues. If people could find a way to care more about issues than who is delivering the message, it would be a giant step forward. Unfortunately, I don`t see it happening in this climate.
 
Hedda Gambler said:
Being born and raised in Norway, it is impossible for me to comprehend the race issues you guys face. I can try to understand it logically, but will never be able to feel it. As a 42 year old white man who has spent a lot of time in the US and being way more than moderately interested in your society, I can relate to other parts of Korver`s story, though. The opting out part seems very spot on to me. With you talk radio, Fox News and the rise of the internet and social media, way too many Americans have opted out of listening to opposing views. Rupert Murdoch made a fantastic business move with the way he created Fox News. For society though, it has been really, really bad. I might be wrong on this, but it seems to me like Americans in general take the easy way out and only listen to outlets that agree with their political views. This is very, very dangerous and is a recipe for disaster in the long run.

For those of you not agreeing on the tone of this debate and want to seek consensus, I think you are wrong. On cases like these, there is no consensus to be reached. The way to address these problems is for people to start educating themselves. I read Redstate and Breitbart not because I agree with the content, but because I think it is important to know how these people think. The "dialogue" today is more often about trying to make fun of the other side than actually discussing issues. If people could find a way to care more about issues than who is delivering the message, it would be a giant step forward. Unfortunately, I don`t see it happening in this climate.
Click to expand...
. I might be wrong on this, but it seems to me like Americans in general take the easy way out and only listen to outlets that agree with their political views.

This is true for me for the most part. I try to watch Fox news, and listen to Rush and other righty radio guys, but I can't take it for long. Their distortion of reality physically hurts. It might be a form of cognitive dissonance, but it truly hurts to listen to. I try to inure myself through exposure, but so far ... no dice.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using JazzFanz mobile app
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
More on that 2nd video, I wonder if @Jazz Spazz and some others still think I'm an idiot with no morals because I believe in voting opposite of my natural tendency to help bring moderation to party polarization.
Click to expand...
Lol, nice try. No clue what you are talking about. I don't remember ever thinking you are an idiot with no morals for any reason.
Care to elaborate? Is this a troll job or something you have been thinking for a while?
 
LoPo said:
Usually, you might have a point. However, the stock market spiked and has stayed high once he won the election.
Click to expand...

I thought we were talking about the economy. The stock market often swings opposite the economy. They are not closely connected.

LoPo said:
People can try to give credit to Obama all they want, but regardless, he is the only 8 year President ever without at least one year of 2% growth. So he came into a wrecked economy and pretty much never fixed it.
Click to expand...

He's also the only 8-year President without a recession during the mid-to-latter part of, or immediately after, his term. Instead of economic swings, we saw slow, steady growth. I'm not sure why you think that is a bad thing.
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
First off, is your avatar a Catan board with a sword through it? Thanks for the dialogue.
Click to expand...

With a d20 as well. It was designed by a gamer for the Metro East Gamers site, but they have stopped using it.

AlaskanAssassin said:
Admittedly, I should do more reading of other intellectuals on matters or race, social economics, etc. However, I wouldn't characterize Sowell's work as descriptions of his own experiences. Anecdotal examples are not what he's using to make his arguments. He's a Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institute. I've only read one of his books, but it was based almost entirely on research performed. I'm not sure calling his work "Standard Right Wing" is accurate either, as his teachings are much more classic liberal or libertarian.
Click to expand...

OK. Most of what I saw were newspaper columns, which are possibly more anecdotal by design.

AlaskanAssassin said:
That's not my understanding of equity, that's how I would describe equality. Equity would be forcing an equality of outcome, as opposed to equality of opportunity. We can't legislate or force our way to provide an equal outcome in life for everyone or every subset of the American people.
Click to expand...

Let's look at a couple of specific examples. Two students both taking the SATs, both neurotypical. One of them was raised middle-class in a safe neighborhood, well-fed, and with well-funded schools. The other was raised in poverty, in an unsafe neighborhood, facing food scarcity, and poorly funded schools. However, they are now taking the same test and will be graded the same way. Is this equality to you (I know some people who would say it is, including Sowell, AFAICT)? For me, equity would be that we help the second child live in a better neighborhood, eat better, and fund their schools. Then, we can see them better fulfill their potential on the test.

Second example. Two students taking the SATs raised in similar environments, one of them has severe dyslexia. The student with dyslexia has a person who helps them read the questions and answers on the test, but does not help them decide the correct answer. That's what I think of as equity. Would that be your word?

For me, equity is removing the disadvantages (or compensating for them) that come with being raised poor, being black, etc. Since I think humans are basically the same, I see equity as achieving equality of outcomes not because we force the end result, but because we even out the starting positions. There will still be janitors and doctors, and doctors will still earn more.
 
NPC D4617 said:
Dont dodge the question. The extreme example was to demonstrate that things arent equal. I could post a white guy with no arms but has legs up against a Royce O'neal and that example is extreme still, but not as much. So the spread is smaller. Where does it meet or where does the white privilege kick in?

What the hell does white privilege even mean if the guy with no arms and no legs doesnt even have it, and he is white?

Who has white privilege? All white people? Some white people? A few white people?

I say its a few white people. And i say there is black privilege too. See Jussie Smollett. Thats proof. You can choose to ignore if you want.
Click to expand...

Here’s the difference. My white neighbor in South Jordan adopted two black kids. After many bad experiences, they now have a rule that his teenage boy can never, I repeat NEVER wear a hoodie over his head. Doesn’t matter time of day or where he’s at. This is an upstanding good kid, and yet they know that he gets treated differently simply because he’s black. They’re not mad about it. They don’t go around saying, woe is me. It’s just a fact of their life. Which to me, is incredibly sad.

This is what white privilege is. I never once even thought to tell my teenager to not where a hood over his head. He’s white.
 
AlaskanAssassin said:
Doesn't everyone have different afflictions and disadvantages they have to fight throughout life? White people have significantly higher rates of suicide than all other racial groups, aside from Native Americans. Is this factored into my White privilege?
Click to expand...

That's a great question. I don't know. For example, to my understanding whites have higher gun ownership rates (for blacks in particular, gun ownership is dangerous), and gun ownership makes suicide more successful. Does the effect persist when you factor in gun ownership? Is suicide caused in part by a feeling that your life is not what it is supposed to be, and if so, does having higher expectations for your life lead to increased rates of suicide? There are probably dozens of ways white privilege could be connected to the suicide rate.

I don't believe there is something about the biology of being white that makes you more prone to suicide, so it is likely to be related to white privilege. Many other sorts of privileges come with some negative aspects. For example, part of male privilege is the acceptance of working more dangerous jobs, leading to early deaths.

AlaskanAssassin said:
Is the fact that millions of dollars every year in scholarships are awarded exclusively to Black students factored in?
Click to expand...

Yes. An attempt to reduce the effects of institutional racism would be related to white privilege, which is a part of institutional racism.

AlaskanAssassin said:
What about colleges requiring lower SAT scores for minority students?
Click to expand...

Ditto.
 
idestroyedthetoilet said:
Since it keeps being brought up in the progress portion of the duscussion, it's complete nonsense that white nationalism is on the rise because of 9-11 or Obama or Trump or whatever happens in the next year or two. Try to have at least a tiny grasp on recent and past history.
Click to expand...

If you mean that, as a percentage of the population or as a part of government policy, white nationalism has not increased this century and is far lower than even 50 years ago, I agree. However, compared to just 10-15 years ago, white nationalism has become more acceptable as a public position, due in no small part to a reaction to Obama and the current POTUS.
 
One Brow said:
Does it show an increasing divide among the American public, or more political party monotony among members of Congress?
Click to expand...
It could be argued it is a lagging indicator of a public divide, since these are the people getting elected even while they are becoming more partisan.
 
One Brow said:
With a d20 as well. It was designed by a gamer for the Metro East Gamers site, but they have stopped using it.



OK. Most of what I saw were newspaper columns, which are possibly more anecdotal by design.



Let's look at a couple of specific examples. Two students both taking the SATs, both neurotypical. One of them was raised middle-class in a safe neighborhood, well-fed, and with well-funded schools. The other was raised in poverty, in an unsafe neighborhood, facing food scarcity, and poorly funded schools. However, they are now taking the same test and will be graded the same way. Is this equality to you (I know some people who would say it is, including Sowell, AFAICT)? For me, equity would be that we help the second child live in a better neighborhood, eat better, and fund their schools. Then, we can see them better fulfill their potential on the test.

Second example. Two students taking the SATs raised in similar environments, one of them has severe dyslexia. The student with dyslexia has a person who helps them read the questions and answers on the test, but does not help them decide the correct answer. That's what I think of as equity. Would that be your word?

For me, equity is removing the disadvantages (or compensating for them) that come with being raised poor, being black, etc. Since I think humans are basically the same, I see equity as achieving equality of outcomes not because we force the end result, but because we even out the starting positions. There will still be janitors and doctors, and doctors will still earn more.
Click to expand...

Are the math or physics books and lectures fundamentally different when comparing high end and low end elementary school in US (in Estonia the books are same but we are also small country)? For example, i guess that learning the Ohm's law should be equally easy or difficult (i.e it depends whether the student wants to understand it or not) no matter whether the teacher/tutor is working in high end or low end school.
Also, i have heard about people who in theory have higher education than i have (diploma wise), but do not understand the side(de)fects about the Ohm's law (was taught to me at school when i was 12 or 13 years old). For example, they might connect heat generator or some other equipment which uses above average amount of power to the outlet, where the area of the electrical wire is 1,5 mm2 or even less instead of a 2,5 mm2 and they received the best grades on the physics class in school ...
 
One Brow said:
Having white privilege doesn't mean you didn't struggle or didn't achieve, it means while you were struggling, you didn't also have an entire additional load of nonsense to fight. To the degree it is a benefit, it is mostly a privative benefit, that is, a benefit of what you don't have to experience.



Or, you could interpret that clip as someone recognizing the person they are talking to has more expertise than she supposed, like if I were to try to talk to infection about medicine and then find out he has a lot more expertise.
Click to expand...

Its not as simple as you are boiling it down too. Simply being black or white does equate to more less struggle.

Not everyone or every place in America sees black in a negative light. In fact, often times people are envious of it. They copy and mimick black people and black culture.
One Brow said:
That's a great question. I don't know. For example, to my understanding whites have higher gun ownership rates (for blacks in particular, gun ownership is dangerous), and gun ownership makes suicide more successful. Does the effect persist when you factor in gun ownership? Is suicide caused in part by a feeling that your life is not what it is supposed to be, and if so, does having higher expectations for your life lead to increased rates of suicide? There are probably dozens of ways white privilege could be connected to the suicide rate.

I don't believe there is something about the biology of being white that makes you more prone to suicide, so it is likely to be related to white privilege. Many other sorts of privileges come with some negative aspects. For example, part of male privilege is the acceptance of working more dangerous jobs, leading to early deaths.



Yes. An attempt to reduce the effects of institutional racism would be related to white privilege, which is a part of institutional racism.



Ditto.
Click to expand...

Lmao

Oh man. This just gets weirder.

Suicide is a benefit to white privilege.

And oh goody yay for me. Male privilege comes with working more dangerous jobs.

White male privilege. What a glorious thing to have. I am more likely to kill myself or die on the job. Sweet!
 
One Brow said:
If you mean that, as a percentage of the population or as a part of government policy, white nationalism has not increased this century and is far lower than even 50 years ago, I agree. However, compared to just 10-15 years ago, white nationalism has become more acceptable as a public position, due in no small part to a reaction to Obama and the current POTUS.
Click to expand...

This is the problem. You people refuse to acknowledge what is really said.

Nobody is saying or supporting white nationalism. People support nationalism(patriotism). Period. You just keep adding the white onto it to feed your narrative.

Seriously, why do you choose to live in this delusional reality? Why cant you people actually discuss things like adults and stop with putting words in people's mouths? You are only convincing morons to be on your side. You cant win this battle with an army of delusional morons. Like lemmings you will all just be led off the cliff.
 
lol @ those who think white supremacy is some extreme fringe position. It's mundane and mainstream. Neo-Nazis are the ideology's extreme fringe, much like ISIS is at Islam's extreme fringe.

As Thriller sig says, get educated.
 
When the Westbrook/fan incident occurred, I reflected on my behavior to see if I have been inappropriate in my actions at the games. I did realize that I was extreme and out of bounds with one player. It was Pau Gasol. I rode him mercilessly saying he sucked etc. That was the only time I have been over the top. I still hate him as a player.

But I have made sure that I am thinking about these issues each game going forward.
 
firegirl said:
Here’s the difference. My white neighbor in South Jordan adopted two black kids. After many bad experiences, they now have a rule that his teenage boy can never, I repeat NEVER wear a hoodie over his head. Doesn’t matter time of day or where he’s at. This is an upstanding good kid, and yet they know that he gets treated differently simply because he’s black. They’re not mad about it. They don’t go around saying, woe is me. It’s just a fact of their life. Which to me, is incredibly sad.

This is what white privilege is. I never once even thought to tell my teenager to not where a hood over his head. He’s white.
Click to expand...
We could very well possibly be neighbors too.


I hope this makes your day.



Hehepeepeecaca
 
One Brow said:
Let's look at a couple of specific examples. Two students both taking the SATs, both neurotypical. One of them was raised middle-class in a safe neighborhood, well-fed, and with well-funded schools. The other was raised in poverty, in an unsafe neighborhood, facing food scarcity, and poorly funded schools. However, they are now taking the same test and will be graded the same way. Is this equality to you (I know some people who would say it is, including Sowell, AFAICT)? For me, equity would be that we help the second child live in a better neighborhood, eat better, and fund their schools. Then, we can see them better fulfill their potential on the test.
Click to expand...
It will make me sound cold-hearted, but I would consider that equality. I would hope that the parent(s) of the impoverished student took advantage of social welfare programs designed to ensure that all young people have their basic needs taken care of (Welfare, food stamps, low income housing, Head Start). I don't think these efforts qualify as equality or equity, but rather a baseline of needs that should be met for a young person. These efforts are not creating equity, based on the results. If your Dad is in jail and Mom is never home because she's busy working two jobs (or worse), it's going to be near impossible to provide a path for this student to excel academically or in life. Even if social programs were better and more effective, it would not create equity among all subsets (race, gender, ethnicity, etc.) of Americans.

Also, does the same push for equity apply between an upper-class student and middle-class student? The upper-class student goes to a private school, better teachers, access to unlimited tutoring, internship experiences, etc. How do we even the playing field between these two students?

One Brow said:
Second example. Two students taking the SATs raised in similar environments, one of them has severe dyslexia. The student with dyslexia has a person who helps them read the questions and answers on the test, but does not help them decide the correct answer. That's what I think of as equity. Would that be your word?
Click to expand...
I would describe this as equality. Again, to me, equity is a focus on the end result to force people or subsets of people to all have equal outcomes. The student with dyslexia is going to face challenges in life that many other will not and will likely have an impact on their quality of life (regardless of assistance provided on a test).

One Brow said:
For me, equity is removing the disadvantages (or compensating for them) that come with being raised poor, being black, etc. Since I think humans are basically the same, I see equity as achieving equality of outcomes not because we force the end result, but because we even out the starting positions. There will still be janitors and doctors, and doctors will still earn more.
Click to expand...

I'm on board with trying to remove certain disadvantages in an attempt to create equal opportunity. As mentioned, we are already attempting to do this through many social welfare programs, among other efforts. Have these efforts had a significant impact on equality of outcome? Not really. Expecting an equality of outcome based on equal starting points is the wrong approach.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top