Racists Anonymous: 12-step cure for disease of “White Privilege”

Spend between $25 and $100 a month to receive a box that helps you be a better ally. That’s the business plan set up by Grand Rapids, Michigan entrepreneurs Marissa Johnson and Leslie Mac, at least.

Every month, they send their subscribers the Safety Pin Box, which Vice reporter Evan McMorris-Santoro describes as being “designed to wake up white people to the realities of being black in America.”

…The Box has only a few hundred subscribers (it would be fun to do a pool estimating how many of them are white Brooklyn liberals), Johnson and Mac are donating some of the proceeds to black female activists, and liberals and lefties themselves have been highly critical of the exercise.

Finally, in conjunction with the Women’s March on Washington, there is the Complicity Cleanse. The goal of this activity is lofty: Freeing yourself from the “triumph of patriarchy, sexism, xenophobia, heterosexism”…and, of course, racism.

https://www.complicitycleanse.com/

After you sign up, you will be sent a “menu” that contains a daily dose of information, resources, questions, actions, challenges– little things to do every single day. The idea is to create a platform of presence in order to forge habits that divest our complicity from the mechanisms of oppression. Once we are aware of our entanglements, we can earnestly begin to dismantle all that allows for the pernicious “-isms” of American identity. Everything on the menu is a suggestion, that will hopefully become a contemplation, a conversation, an act, and eventually an awakened pattern. Little by little we will lesson our enurement with white supremacist, patriarchal rule, and our complicity in the suffering of others.


Hi! I’m Leslie and I would enjoy the privilege of never reporting on “Racists Anonymous,” safety pins, or Complicity Cleanses again.

No word on whether you have to wear a Pussy Hat when you take that cleanse, however.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2017/01/pussy-hat-protests-planned-for-trumps-inauguration/

The GoFundMe site for the tortured teen has earned nearly $160,000 to help in the recovery from his “white privilege”. We hope that during Trump’s presidency that the racial divide is lessened and the inane, progressive products and dramas disappear entirely

http://www.wpsdlocal6.com/story/34231120/nearly-158000-raised-for-chicago-area-beating-victim

>>99768
>Last week, we covered the videoptaped torture of a mentally disabled Chicago teen at the hands of 4 black thugs, who taunted him with anti-white and anti-Trump insults.
Wasn't that video confirmed to be fake?

>>99795
Everything is FakeNews™ in TheCurrentYear™

>>99795
No.

I'm so outraged, but isn't this more of an editorial? Should this really be on this board?

>>99826
What makes it an editorial? The article is reporting on news.

>The program is the brainchild of Reverend Ron Buford, a black pastor who worried that conversations about race left him angry and white participants guilty. He says he realized the need for the self-improvement program after witnessing Trump’s rise to power.

>Every month, they send their subscribers the Safety Pin Box, which Vice reporter Evan McMorris-Santoro describes as being “designed to wake up white people to the realities of being black in America.”

>>99828
Then Rev. Buford is a fucking idiot. You are never, EVER, going to get a racist person in this day and age to stop hating black people by telling him what it's like. It doesn't matter how you fucking say it, he doesn't give a shit.

So, the only people who will listen to this are guilt-ridden white people, who will never ever do anything against you anyway, and normal white people, who are getting really fucking tired of being lumped in with racists for not sucking dick and kowtowing every time a conversation about race turns up.

>>99828
You wrote a massive /pol/ bait wall of text in the style of a news report to push your viewpoint

>>99831
he is a genious businessman m8

>>99838
oh no! reality is breaking my delusions!

>>99844
The only thing that I said about my own views was
>I'm so outraged
Why are you so defensive?

>>99848
>You wrote a massive /pol/ bait wall of text in the style of a news report to push your viewpoint

not everything is /pol/ bait

>>99848
that was another person op here this news not an editorial

>>99768
*sigh*
we really are going to get 8 years of Trump aren't we?
Why can't the left learn their lessons? It's like they actually want Trump to get re-elected

>>99769
nice writing!

>>99768
wanna talk about racist how about the fact that mcdonalds doesnt hire white people? equal opportunity my ass.

>>99955
?

>>99945
Who wrote it? Where was it published?

>>100010
Do I have to spoon feed you?
Leslie Eastman Legal Insurrection

>>100013
Oh, so it's a blog, very well then

>>100015
Legal Insurrection now is one of the most widely cited and influential conservative websites, with hundreds of thousands of visitors per month. Our work has been highlighted by top conservative radio personalities, such as Rush Limbaugh and Mark Levin, and Professor Jacobson regularly appears as a guest on radio shows across the nation.

Our writings have been linked by virtually every major conservative publication and many mainstream media publications, including The Atlantic Wire, The National Review, The Hill, New York Magazine’s “Daily Intel”, The Christian Science Monitor, The Boston Herald, The New York Times, Gothamist, CBS News, The Wall Street Journal, Investor’s Business Daily, The Washington Times, AOL News, The Week, and many, many others.

http://legalinsurrection.com/about/

>>100021
Legal Insurrection went live onOctober 12, 2008, originally at Google Blogger. We hit ourone-millionth visitabout 11.5 months later, our second million a few months after that, and since then readership and linkage from major websiteshave grown dramatically.

In June 2011, we switched to a self-hosted WordPress format with a custom design which incorporates manyunique functionsboth visible to readers and behind the scenes.

In August 2012, we opened a related blog,College Insurrection.

http://legalinsurrection.com/about/

>>99948
>why won't the left be good little cucks and abandon their principles?

>>100042
>Progressives
>Principles
Pick one they only follow what they think will get them power which is why they are so cosy with wall street.

>>100042
>cuckposter
>idiot
pick both
Anyways the left USED to be about fighting racism/sexism and supporting a social egalitarian platform. If anything this SJW nonsense is the left abandoning their old principles of equality

>>99768
Children and females are far more discriminated against, but I never hear how they stand up and speak out for them. The way "some" of them babble, they're the only ones suffering in this world. Lots of people in the world professing they and "their kind" suffer the most: They can't all be telling the truth. I think they really don't care about their group; only trying to blame everyone else for their individual inadequacies, incompetence and ignorance.

>>99955
>mcdonalds doesnt hire white people
Do you smoke crack?

>>100046
>t. someone who doesn't know what progressivism means

>>100054
SJWs aren't the mainstream left.

>>100076
What does it mean to you anon?

>>99768
Your blog isn't news

>>99768
>black male hand, white female hand
Why is it always this combo put on everywhere?

>>100081
>implying it isn't a black female hand and a white nu-male metrosexual hand

>>100081
That is clearly a black female hand: she is even wearing purple nail polish.

Try harder, faggot.

This shit is offensive. Like I'm a starving African or something.

Seem to me that people who are miserable in their own lives have a need to blame everyone else for it. No one wants to accept the consequences of their choices. What can I other than free will can be a bitch sometimes.

>>100076
Did you miss this past election? Where a tumblr feminist ran for president? Or the last 8 years? Obama might not have been an SJW when he started but he got pretty close by the end.
Have you heard about the Women's March? Bet you thought it was just a nice protest about abortion rights and such. Nope, look at their actual platform: It's tumblr SJW bullshit

I still call myself a liberal I guess, but yes SJWs have become the mainstream left now

>>100270
SJWs are about as mainstream as /pol/

>>100263
That's because there are things that were beyond their own control that cause them to dive into poverty.

>>100285
it must be nice living in a flyover state.

>>100285
Again, you're living under a fucking rock. Have you been on a university campus in America in the last 5 years? Do you pay attention to the media these days? Did you completely tune out for Hillary Clinton's campaign? The Democrats literally had Lena Dunham, queen of SJWs, as a speaker at their convention. Hillary's platform looked like it came straight out of tumblr. The Women's March happening next week to protest Trump isn't some reasonable, rational group of people protesting legitimate issues, their official statement is very SJW

>>100311
> Have you been on a university campus in America in the last 5 years?
I have been REGULARLY ATTENDING UNIVERSITY since 2012, and the most "sjw" thing I've seen is flyers for a 100% OPTIONAL lecture offering advice on how to identify signs of an abusive relationship.

>>100319
Must be nice to be at a small university.

>>100042
But, it's the same thing. If this is what the Left's principles are, being a doormat cuck nodding your head and whispering "yessuh" to anyone just because of their skin color, then they're one and the same. What exactly do you think this idea that white people get to have exactly no say in what's a two-way racial street qualifies as if not exactly that?

>>The program is the brainchild of Reverend


I stopped reading right there. Religion has nothing to do with it.

>>99768
This was going nowhere from the start because so many people's idea of what honest racial discussions are is Listen to everything I tell you, shut up, and nod you head. If you don't, you're a racist or at the very least abetting people who are."

Seriously, all the onus for healing race relations is placed on whites when it takes two to tango. When was the last time anyone started a program like this with the intent to impart empathy for whites onto blacks? It's only ever a one way street with these people and at a certain point it just feels like being proselytized to, not an actual discussion.

>>100054
No, the left is still fighting for equality, but it turns out that the majority group doesn't want ``social egalitarianism", because it means they lose power. So they have begun to frame a fight for equality as a war on their right to survive. They say that opposing police brutality, or supporting women's autonomy, is ``White genocide"

>>101830
You misunderstand the left's principles. We don't support anyone, white or non-white, who opposes equality, yet that is exactly what >>99948 is demanding we do. White people DO have a say as individuals in the left, but there seems to be no white identity movement that doesn't advocate white supremacy, or at the very least intolerance of other races. This is likely due to the fact that whites are, and have long been, the majority in the West, and as such there is really no uniting factor among a group that is essentially ``default".

>>101981
It's not about empathy, it's about recognizing privilege. You can intend to have empathy for other races, but it's unlikely to lead to anything positive if you're unwilling to acknowledge your own privilege. Too many people think pointing out their privilege is an attack on them. It's not, it's merely pointing out that their experiences lead to assumptions about the world that are not representative of the difficulties of other groups face. Saying someone is blinded by white privilege is no different than saying "You're not an aeronautical engineer, so you probably don't know much about designing airplanes."

>>100066
What do you mean exactly? People who oppose discrimination against women are labeled SJW feminists, and unfortunately fighting for the rights of children has been co-opted by a group of scumbags who use it as a cover to justify pedophilia.

>>102575
>Too many people think pointing out their privilege is an attack on them.
I think reducing the concept to a negative-sounding buzzword is one of the big problems here. Its one thing to say "You're not (whatever minority) so you don't know what they deal with"- most reasonable people could agree with such a statement. But when people talk about "privilege" to the majority, it often comes across like they're being blamed and/or expected to give something up rather than just allowing others to get on the same level. There's also the fact that economic privilege- the only sort of privilege that's so blatantly obvious that both sides can usually agree that its an issue- tends to get ignored in such discussions. It certainly doesn't help when a small vocal minority of far-left authoritarian extremists ("SJWs") use it as a rhetorical bludgeon and shame people, which is only made worse by the fact that the internet and social media places these crazies in the spotlight. You'll notice many right-wing people seem to treat people like "Big Red" as representative of the left rather than a crazy fringe element, which makes them get defensive.
Don't get me wrong here, I think a huge portion of conservatives have gone full retard lately, but I think the big reasons for it are the same as when legitimate protesters turn to senseless rioting and destruction of property- these people feel that "the system" is working against them in some way and they're eager to push back at the first opportunity, even if they're just latching onto the first ridiculous scapegoat they can find. I think if you want to get through to these people its important to try to empathize with them to some degree and frame your argument in a way that makes sense from their point of view, even if they're acting like tremendous morons at the time.

>>102575
>the left is still fighting for equality,
haha

>but there seems to be no white identity movement that doesn't advocate white supremacy,
of course you wont notice them when you just blindly call them all evil nazis.

Why people are getting judged based on quantity of melatonin in their skin??
White vs black vs brown vs red vs yellow vs purple - if u don't see a person but only their skin u r racist.
Why only black lives matter? Why u r trying to make me, European, whose ancestors built this civilization ashamed of my roots? All lives matter - but we r no longer allowed to say that - or lose job friends be sued!!! This is f&cking racism.
As long as brainwashed morons support ANY race against Other race - there will be no peace. Think who actually pushing this agenda and who is profiting. Not me, not u

>>102575
Just a question, why is there never any movement stressing the privilege other races enjoy? Why is it always a discussion meant for whites and whites only? A key defining point of your concept of privilege is those who have it are often incapable of seeing it and yet we're supposed to just accept non-whites don't have intrinsic privilege because they simply say so, an argument no different than the whites who disagree with your politics. If pointing out privilege isn't an attack, why do non-whites react so viscerally when it's suggested they have sets all their own that whites do not enjoy?

Whites are rapidly declining in the West, even in the places where they natively come from. Tell me, how much longer do you plan to excuse the hatred of non-whites and label one-sided conversations with pretty platitudes like "equality," and "justice," when that rhetoric is fueling anti-white sentiment towards a rapidly shrinking group? Do you have any sort of condition set down for when people are allowed to stop self-flagellating over their invisible privileges or are we all obligated to devolve into a demographic of passive neurotics for eternity?

You don't see any white identity movements that aren't hateful because you've conditioned yourself to see any white identity movement as hate on principle while viewing the undeniable positives of European influence as a human default position. When you've stripped the positives of European civilization from its context to apply it as a universal set of values while leaving the nadirs and negatives, it's not that surprising to come to the conclusion the only form of white identity is hate.

Nor do you ever seem to have the same consternation for other identity movements that are just as militant, hateful and prone to racial violence as the white ones you love to denigrate.

What does white supremacy actually mean to you? Define it in plain and clear terms.

>>102577
They're labeled that because frequently the only issues they choose to take stands on are inconsequential and petty. There's absolutely no reason the NYC metro needed to spend taxpayer money to plaster subways with anti-manspreading signs, yet here we are.

When the cause du jour of your anti-discrimination movement centers around things like the temperature of air conditioners, nigh-nonexistent wage gaps, fabricated rape statistics, and the inherent toxicity of masculinity then you're going to get labeled with those terms.

Aside from access to abortion and birth control I can't think of a single thing that openly discriminates against women or is in a position to impede their freedom. It gets very old hearing about how victimized women are just because they don't form 50% of Fortune 500 CEOs.

>>100311
Have you ever wondered why academics are so overwhelmingly progressive?

>>102932
>Have you ever wondered why academics are so overwhelmingly progressive?
no

>>102932
Because they're sheltered and know nothing of the real world and how it works.
Plus, communist infilatration and money.

>>102942
>Because they're sheltered and know nothing of the real world and how it works.
please enlighten me, how does the world work?

>>102947
Not him, but it's not called an ivory tower for nothing

>>102947
Simple, fucking elitists that know nothing about the threat to heritage of the American people.

>>102932
its easy to blindly pursue nice sounding ideals when the consequences of doing so will never affect you.

specially when you can claim the moral highground so anyone that disagrees or finds fault with what you do is evil.

>>102953
>American
yawn

>>102618
>of course you wont notice them when you just blindly call them all evil nazis.
Anyone who doesn't want non-whites to be first class citizens in America or Europe is a Nazi as far as I'm concerned.

>>102669
It's not about numerical majority, it's about which groups hold the most power. Which is still solidly whites in the West. If we're limiting the discussion to the West, the only places where say "black privilege" or "Asian privilege" is a real thing is within their own communities or subcultures.

>>103079
What, pray tell, does a corporate executive being white mean for a poor white person living as a minority in their community? Will the rich man simply share his wealth with other people on the sole basis of their race? The rich and powerful are white because the majority is white. The rich and powerful tend to be white, but that does not mean being white means riches and power. To conflate it otherwise is to boil everyone down to their race, a rather oddly racist viewpoint considering people of your brand of politics usually claim to be fighting that.

How do you arbitrarily define this power? What observable conditions have to be met in order for one group to have it? Define it please. Are you saying whites will always have this privilege until they're stripped of power within their own native lands?

Would you argue a rich white businessman traveling to China or Japan loses his privilege? He gets to eat at the finest restaurants, stay at the comfiest hotels, and enjoy the best of the local accommodations, yet he has no legal or physical power within these countries. Does he no longer have privilege over the poor and downtrodden within those countries?

You're suggesting exactly that. I don't imagine many African nations set aside scholarships for black men simply because they're black. The West does. I don't imagine many companies that operate within large African nations have strict diversity quotas designed to enfranchise racial minorities like the West does. I don't imagine minorities in African or Asian nations enjoy a zeitgeist that dictates they and only they are the racially informed.

Does the Asian real estate tycoon visiting Seattle and Vancouver no longer have privilege even if he has to drive by hordes of homeless whites to get to his property? Do blacks in the UK not enjoy a certain kind of privilege from things like the BBC openly stating it prefers to hire them over natives?

You still did not define white supremacy.

>>103094
>What, pray tell, does a corporate executive being white mean for a poor white person living as a minority in their community? Will the rich man simply share his wealth with other people on the sole basis of their race? The rich and powerful are white because the majority is white. The rich and powerful tend to be white
White people tend to support policies that benefit people like them. That means that poor whites don't get MUCH, but they still get more than poor blacks do for example.

>Would you argue a rich white businessman traveling to China or Japan loses his privilege?
He doesn't "lose his privilege" (because that would imply something actually changes in him), but rather he enters a situation where his privilege no longer applies.

>He gets to eat at the finest restaurants, stay at the comfiest hotels, and enjoy the best of the local accommodations
There's no law saying blacks in America can't do those things either, that doesn't mean white privilege doesn't exist here though. Same is true of other countries.

> Does he no longer have privilege over the poor and downtrodden within those countries?
That depends on specifics. He certainly doesn't have RACIAL privilege over them, but he may still have other forms of privilege, mainly depending on the respective extents of his wealth and the xenophobia of the culture of the country in question.

> I don't imagine many African nations set aside scholarships for black men simply because they're black. The West does. I don't imagine many companies that operate within large African nations have strict diversity quotas designed to enfranchise racial minorities like the West does.
There's no NEED for those things, because in most cases of these sorts of countries black people are a minority (both statistically and in terms of power).

>>103094
>Does the Asian real estate tycoon visiting Seattle and Vancouver no longer have privilege even if he has to drive by hordes of homeless whites to get to his property?
They' don't have white privilege, but they do still have rich privilege.

>You still did not define white supremacy.
The belief that it is right and proper for white people in a country to be granted an artificial net advantage on the basis of their race.

>>103790
>White people tend to support policies that benefit people like them.
thats actually jews.
whites are quite equal with their altruism. probably more then any other group of people.

> but rather he enters a situation where his privilege no longer applies.
you dont even know what "privilege" is

>>103790
Are you sure white people only support politics that benefit them? Because I'm sure the BBC choosing to hire non-whites over them doesn't do that. I'm sure Sally Boynton exclaiming her priority as a would-be DNC chair to be "shutting down other white people," doesn't benefit other whites. I'm sure European countries adopting immigration stances that encourage demographic replacement doesn't benefit white people.

Poor whites don't get anything from rich whites, because people don't magically share their assets with others based on skin color. Meanwhile, poor blacks have access to programs meant to help them on the basis of their race alone that poor whites do not. Poor blacks can talk about their economic plight without inspiring dismissive apathy from progressives. Are those not a manifestations of black privilege? Are you saying it's pertinent to compare tangible relief programs to some invisible umbrella of white back scratching you can't prove exists? Are you saying your argument can't equally apply to non-whites if what you're saying is true?

I always thought privilege was based on society and overwhelming views, but according to you, privilege is an innate thing and an immutable quality that someone can't lose even by choosing to live in a place where they have no legal power. We're supposed to just believe you that it's still there even though it's not doing anything when you can't even tangibly prove it exists in situations where you say it is doing something? Is privilege a reflection of someone's place within society and therefore subject to change based on society, or is it a permanent stain and an albatross to be hung from someones neck? You can't have it both ways.

>>103957
(cont)

The Asian demographic in the US is the richest and most socially stable in observable terms. There are conventions unique to Asian culture in how children are raised or how public funds are appropriated that benefit and enrich their communities profoundly. Are you saying none of that translates to an Asian privilege that any other group does not enjoy? I hear so much of how having a stable, well-off family and a close-knit community is a major contributor to someone's privilege, yet the group that has the most observable set of these does not have its own sets of privileges for some reason. Asian property-owners have no power or privilege in cities within the Pacific Northwest that have allowed them to gain and maintain their immense wealth, but those appalling numbers of drug-addicted and homeless whites still maintain a racial privilege?

Your definition of white supremacy seems a bit open-ended there. How, pray tell, are you determining what these artificial net advantages are? How are you so sure advantages being granted are being given on the sole basis of race alone? According to progressives, being amongst people with your own skin color confers advantages and it'd be silly not to imply some of that is based on race. Does that mean African nations practice black supremacy? Does that mean the proper antidote to white supremacy is an erosion to white demographics that allow white people to enjoy such an advantage?

This is the problem with all this hand-wringing nonsense over privilege and the way progressives categorize it. It ignores practical reality and lofty idealism at the same time by eschewing individualism and abandoning the idea of a post-racial egalitarian future. It takes no account of correlation and causation, entirely conflating the two on such a massive scale that entire swathes of people are then grouped according to their basest, most fundamental and immutable qualities.

>>103957
>Are you sure white people only support politics that benefit them?
No, this isn't a complete, 100% description of everything white people do, nor is it unique to white people. It's just part of the general principle that people are more interested in helping who they consider the "in group" than with the "out group".

>I'm sure European countries adopting immigration stances that encourage demographic replacement doesn't benefit white people.
I'd say that DOES benefit white people in a general sense, because otherwise there would eventually be a severe labor shortage, which would of course ultimately entail a shortage of commodities.

>privilege is an innate thing and an immutable quality that someone can't lose even by choosing to live in a place where they have no legal power
Where exactly was that said? Privilege comes from not only legal, but also social factors, so if people give you preferential treatment without being legally compelled too, that's still privilege. Privilege that is PURELY legal is actually less of a big deal, since it can vanish overnight just be repealing the law. Social-based privileges on the other hand take much longer to change.

>Is privilege a reflection of someone's place within society and therefore subject to change based on society, or is it a permanent stain and an albatross to be hung from someones neck? You can't have it both ways.
It's not permanent, and it's misleading to view privilege as some kind of "black mark". However, as most privilege comes from social values and attitudes, it exhibits resistance to change, so it doesn't vanish overnight, and while it evolves in terms of magnitude and form, it can take centuries to disappear entirely.

>>103980
>Your definition of white supremacy seems a bit open-ended there. How, pray tell, are you determining what these artificial net advantages are?
"Artificial" basically means they're granted by society or government, and don't come solely from one's own abilities. If whites come out ahead, and it is solely due to them having greater innate ability, then it's not white privilege. On the other hand, if their superior outcomes are due to being granted greater access to education, greater employment opportunities, and so on, in comparison to other races, then the movement that led to these advantages is white supremacy.

>Does that mean African nations practice black supremacy?
Arguably, though the notion of "$RACE supremacy" is tied to the idea that certain races are granted benefits by society COMPARED TO other races living in that same society. So it's not really meaningful unless it's a multi-racial society. But if blacks are given preferential treatment by the courts, have greater access to education, or more rights under law, compared to whites and other races, all other things being equal, then yes, that would be black supremacy.

>abandoning the idea of a post-racial egalitarian future
The problem with "the idea of a post-racial egalitarian future" is the assumption that it is already here, when it has not yet actually been achieved. This attitude discourages an effort to move towards egalitarianism, since people feel that it has already been achieved. Eventually, it should be achieved, and then all racial privileges and differences in treatment should be abolished, but pretending the ideal has been achieved, before that actually happens, isn't helpful.

>>104554
>Privilege that is PURELY legal is actually less of a big deal
no.

>>104565
Why not?

I got my arm scratched by my friends cat should I not be angry at my grandmas pussy!? This herez mah logic

>>104678
because money is the most important privilege at all.
>since it can vanish overnight just be repealing the law.
and no, it wont just go away.

>>99768
>one time black people did something bad so racism doesn't exist

>>104554
You did quite an admirable job completely downplaying the overwhelming negatives of a society demographically replacing itself with a completely foreign one just because it leads to cheap commodities and booming markets.

I am perplexed time and time again how the so-called progressive liberals around me echo the sentiments of free-marketeers to the point of nigh-objectivism in their lauding of creating permanent slave castes to capital, just so long as it consists of people exploitable in the name of racial struggle. Explain to me why cheap goods are worth completely undoing one's own culture perhaps?

All this discussion of privilege has reminded me is the fact you have no way of proving it even exists in the way you say it does. Can you without any doubt prove that any success a demographic enjoys is due to an unearned and unfair advantage and not honest success? Can you peel back all the infinite complexities of the human mind and spirit and without any shroud of uncertainty accurately diagnose a singular problem as one of privilege versus the unquantifiable list of other interwoven paradigms that make up the human experience?

Even if you somehow could, do you have any ounce of confidence that such a distinction won't be purposefully ignored, conflated, and smeared to fulfill any amount of agendas? Even if you could point out the privilege with crystal clarity, what makes you think ideologues won't intentionally conflate it with innate success? What happens when two people can't tell either apart?

You will never get a post-racial future navel-gazing into cognitive knots and lecturing people over the innate privileges they carry because of the color of their skin. You're right, we're not there, but it will never happen as long as we strive for it with the interpretative lens you're offering. All you will get is chaos and bloody retribution. You will never stop the racial game by perpetuating it.

>>105061
>All this discussion of privilege has reminded me is the fact you have no way of proving it even exists in the way you say it does. Can you without any doubt prove that any success a demographic enjoys is due to an unearned and unfair advantage and not honest success? Can you peel back all the infinite complexities of the human mind and spirit and without any shroud of uncertainty accurately diagnose a singular problem as one of privilege versus the unquantifiable list of other interwoven paradigms that make up the human experience?
All social analysis involves a degree of uncertainty.

>>105420
Yes, and the purveyors of the idea of white privilege conveniently leave out that massive loophole and instead ask others to prove negatives when the burden and onus of argument is on them. Your answer is a 'no,' padded with niceties to soften its impact, but it's a 'no' all the same. You cannot prove it exists in any capacity so as to eliminate doubt of it acting in its effects alone and not with the infinite number of contributing factors that make up everyday human life.

Forgive me if I'm a bit hesitant to see societal adoption of blatantly racist laws because the drafters adhere to a school of sociology that tiptoes around its own fallibility as social analysis in the first place.

Forgive me for not rushing to amend educational curricula to induce a hyper-neurotic and deleterious awareness of race because of a shaky sociological hypothesis that can't even objectively prove its own existence within the metrics its own supporters choose to present skeptics.

>>104723
>one time black people did something bad so racism doesn't exist
>one time

You're the only fuckwit pretending racism doesn't exist. You and every person like you who can hear about a white guy getting his shit kicked in while the attacker shouts KILL ALL WHITES and say "that doesn't mean it was racially motivated though!"

You and the people like you are the ones fueling racial tension and every person who dies, white, black, brown or blue, at the hands of someone who hated them for their skin? It's on you.

>>105509
>You and every person like you who can hear about a white guy getting his shit kicked in while the attacker shouts KILL ALL WHITES and say "that doesn't mean it was racially motivated though!"
Who are these people you're talking about?

>>105759
That one black woman.

That Chimichanga girl who thinks you can't be racist against whites.

>>105759
Symone Sanders, Bernie Sanders ex-press secretary pretty much said as much when she reacted with apprehension at the idea of the Chicago four being charge for hate crimes. She's also the same woman of "poor white people," fame when videos of Trump supporters being attacked physically and verbally started to surface post-election.

>>105768
It's not hard to find people espousing the sentiment of racism being a one-sided exchange or denying it can even adversely affect some groups. I don't know how anyone paying attention to the cultural zeitgeist can honestly admit the idea is just an ineffectual strawman except as an attempt to downplay the trend. It's a growing problem that isn't going to go away just be pretending it doesn't exist because the people speaking and their extreme ideas challenge your sense of cognitive dissonance.

>>105781
I've just taught myself to say 'racially prejudiced' now. It's an easy adjustment and takes the wind out of their sails.

>>105784
While it's a neat side-step, it's still in a way acquiescence to their assertions. Racism is a very loaded word. The thought of it brings to mind a cavalcade of different pictures, thoughts, and emotional connotations. The people who describe it as a crime only applicable to one demographic don't care if "racially prejudiced," or "racially discriminatory," essentially mean the same thing in practical terms, they're only interested in guarding the power the word has with laymen's ears.

It's incredibly important that they know it is not their word, that it accurate describes many of their own opinions. The weasel-worded dance around the word is nothing more than another game of cognitive dissonance trying to lessen the twisting and contorting of principles and values to suit a one-sided, hypocritical agenda.

It's racism. Simple and pure. Do not give into the people who guard this word not for its definition, but for the power it has which they wish to monopolize.

>>102575
>It's not about empathy, it's about recognizing privilege. You can intend to have empathy for other races, but it's unlikely to lead to anything positive if you're unwilling to acknowledge your own privilege. Too many people think pointing out their privilege is an attack on them.

Adult privilege:
>drive
>buy alcohol
>get married (or gay-married)
all adults have these privileges
no minors have these privileges

Now, name something that all white people may do and no Chinese people may do.

>>100042
>good little cucks
You mean they aren't already?

>>105435
If there isn't something that
>all white people may do
>no non-white people may do
and
>sanctions against non-group members who try to do what they don't have the white privilege to do
>sovereign, administrative or contract white privilege grantor

there is no "white privilege.

>>103079
>Nazi
Because you're a fucking retard.

If I see someone 12 years old driving on the highway (i. e., doing something that he, because of his age, doesn't have the privilege to do) I can call the police, describe the car and have him stopped. I'd like to know from the "white privilege" people, what remedies do I as a white person have for Oprah Winfrey usurping my white privilege?

Conflating aggregate group advantages. with "privilege" misnomer sidesteps discussion of whence the aggregate advantages arise.

Set IQ at 100 and you'll see near parity for income among blacks and whites (but not wealth, as there are also aggregate time preference differences).

>>109371
Don't play word games with me. I don't care if you're ``well actually I'm technically not a Nazi because reasons", if you think people should be forbidden from being first-class citizens on the basis of their race or ethnicity, then I see you as a threat to society.

>>109367
>>109370
>>109373
Okay, let's call it "preferential treatment of whites" instead of "white privilege". Does your argument still hold water?

ITT: Despair.

Humans wake up please.

>>109722
Not him, but you'd need to prove whites receive the treatment you say they do enough for your criteria to apply to the group as a whole. I doubt you'd be able to.

Secondly, you'd need to recognize the same kind of treatment other groups receive, because any criteria you use to determine preferential treatment will undoubtedly show the same for other groups and ignoring that will just make you a partisan hypocrite of the highest order.

>>99768
I have the 1 step to cure the disease of "white privilege"

1. Ethnics to go back home and cry about white achievement.

There, you have your cure.

>>99795
They got charged.

>>99768
Brainwashing camps then.

Naturally only to brainwash whites.

Keep at it, it justs people more and more fed up with the fascist left and their hate campaign of all things white.

this is not news