fromderinside
Mazzie Daius
- Joined
- Oct 6, 2008
- Messages
- 15,945
- Basic Beliefs
- optimist
I was reading the Krugman column "The Angry White Man Caucus" when I was struck by an apparent problem with those of privilege being many of the ones running for office or running the country.
The problem is this. Can those with societal privilege legislate and govern in a multi-status system of government when they obviously are there to preserve their advantages over those who are the targets of their privilege?
This became obvious when one who has privilege is rallied around because he is angry about having his privilege challenged by those from a less less privileged status as recent polls indicate. One can't say I don't remember that incident as easily as one can say I remember that incident for the counter reasoning those of privilege used when they denigrated an accuser. It is as likely that a what one considers minor event will not be remembered as it will for who considers the same event major and traumatic will remember the event.
The point is why denigrate and edeny when one doesn't actually remember unless one is fearful that one may have unknowing done something that caused another great harm while one considered it just play or fun, a trifle. Isn't that immoral and unbalanced?
I found the approach of denial and responsibility transfer as an act of cowardice and explicitly immoral by the privileged ones who acted thus. Even Senator Collins comes up short here.
Jump in the water's political but isn't it moral as well?
The problem is this. Can those with societal privilege legislate and govern in a multi-status system of government when they obviously are there to preserve their advantages over those who are the targets of their privilege?
What distinguished Trump voters was, instead, racial resentment. Furthermore, this resentment was and is driven not by actual economic losses at the hands of minority groups, but by fear of losing status in a changing country, one in which the privilege of being a white man isn’t what it used to be.
This became obvious when one who has privilege is rallied around because he is angry about having his privilege challenged by those from a less less privileged status as recent polls indicate. One can't say I don't remember that incident as easily as one can say I remember that incident for the counter reasoning those of privilege used when they denigrated an accuser. It is as likely that a what one considers minor event will not be remembered as it will for who considers the same event major and traumatic will remember the event.
The point is why denigrate and edeny when one doesn't actually remember unless one is fearful that one may have unknowing done something that caused another great harm while one considered it just play or fun, a trifle. Isn't that immoral and unbalanced?
I found the approach of denial and responsibility transfer as an act of cowardice and explicitly immoral by the privileged ones who acted thus. Even Senator Collins comes up short here.
Jump in the water's political but isn't it moral as well?