What about the White Men????????

[fromderinside]

Ask the white who are using these people as their leverage point for complaining against blacks. Sees to the you've identified only one leg of legitimate complaint. I suspect the other is minority denigration of some sort, like being a 'jew', a 'kike,' and 'nick', a 'fag', a 'cunt', a 'pussy' or something along those lines. There might even be a third leg like a stool. But there will never be a white evangelical eligible for whining in the US.*

Its the largest of the religious groups in the US and among the religious comes the highest incidence of bigotry.

If they are complaining that they have experienced discrimination because they are white and evangelical, we shouldn't just simply dismiss their experience out of hand, but neither is such forms of discrimination common enough to really merit society's attention. When such discrimination does legitimately manifest itself, we should certainly condemn it as we condemn other forms of discrimination. Just because whites and evangelicals have social positions of power does not make legitimate instances of discrimination against them somehow something that we should just ignore and ridicule those who complain about such instances.

On the other hand, if they are being discriminated against because they grew up in a trailer park, but they also happen to be white and evangelical, I think their claims are at least worthy of our attention.

The impoverished, those would would live in trailer parks or less grandly possibly form a majority of Americans by now. Count children, aged and others depending totally on SS who get less than $17 K per year, and those of income earning age not otherwise already mentioned who make less than $17 K per year.

 

[Bronzeage]

The problem of groups who target white poverty is they tend to concentrate on maintaining black poverty as their chief strategy, as if a reduction in black poverty means whites will have to take their place. Of course, the best way to keep any group in poverty is to restrict education and political access.

So your problem would be the methods of such groups, not necessarily the group they target in helping? I agree that such methods are despicable, but I would criticize them based on the methods as well as their strict focus on skin color. I think it best when groups transcend skin color and focus on people who need the most help or who have experienced discrimination (whether they be black or are associated with negative stereotypes of growing up in a trailer park), regardless of skin color.

Yes, I do have a problem with their methods, since those methods included murder and arson. Beyond that, they never actually did anything for poor whites. Their actions were motivated by fear and hatred, not any particular affection for poor white people.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Fox's Tantaros: 'Where Are The Organizations In Defense Of White Men?'

Fox's Andrea Tantaros played the poor aggrieved picked on white Christian conservative card on this Monday's Outnumbered. Who going to look out for the white men!? Someone's got to look out for the white men!!

What about the poor, put-upon, pitiful christian white men? SAVE THEM!!!

Racial discrimination is racial discrimination no matter which race the perpetrator is. As I have not seen the full context I could not as yet form any opinion if there was any racial discrimination.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

I think you do understand (if I have noticed nothing else about you, I have noticed you are not stupid, dense, or uninformed), hence the excess verbiage instead of the YES or NO asked for.

Do you see any differentiation between poor people (people lacking material wealth) and poverty (a social condition of want)?

What do you mean by "a social condition of want"?

Yes, I agree that the common definition of people who are poor and people who are living in poverty typically refers to two different sets of people, with a lot of overlap between the two groups.

Poverty is a problem of society. A person stranded on a deserted island has no material wealth but would not be described as living in poverty. Destitution, distress, and deprivation yes, but not poverty.

Poverty is a problem of society and when viewed that way, solutions are aimed at bettering society and lessening the conditions that propagate poverty. Much like how we think of cancer. We fight the disease not the people with the disease.

Now in the 1930s when poverty had this face

the nation changed social policy and instituted social programs. There were conservatives who blamed the woman, but they were in the minority.

Today, when poverty has this face

poverty the social condition is pushed from the public mind and replaced with individual poor people making wrong and willful decisions. There are no conditions of social origin that make people poor, just poor people who won't behave right.

And that is the privilege. One way of thinking gets you help, the other gets you blamed. And the twisted trick is this. It becomes so important to blame the black poor and punish them that the white poor wind up having to suffer too with many of those same poor white poor people supporting the blaming of the poor.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Now in the 1930s when poverty had this face
View attachment 3003
the nation changed social policy and instituted social programs. There were conservatives who blamed the woman, but they were in the minority.

Note what else was happening. Remember the Great Depression? She was likely a victim of it.

Today, when poverty has this face
View attachment 3004
poverty the social condition is pushed from the public mind and replaced with individual poor people making wrong and willful decisions. There are no conditions of social origin that make people poor, just poor people who won't behave right.

We have no great depression now. Also, I see a woman who doesn't care what her children are doing--she's ignoring the open refrigerator door that wastes electricity and shortens the life of the food in the fridge. Also, the one in her arms looks pretty young--and we do have effective contraception around these days. That makes it likely that irresponsible childbearing has something to do with her plight.


To sum up: Picture #1 looks like someone suffering from external factors, #2 looks like someone suffering from internal factors.

 

[AthenaAwakened]

Now in the 1930s when poverty had this face
View attachment 3003
the nation changed social policy and instituted social programs. There were conservatives who blamed the woman, but they were in the minority.

Note what else was happening. Remember the Great Depression? She was likely a victim of it.

Today, when poverty has this face
View attachment 3004
poverty the social condition is pushed from the public mind and replaced with individual poor people making wrong and willful decisions. There are no conditions of social origin that make people poor, just poor people who won't behave right.

We have no great depression now. Also, I see a woman who doesn't care what her children are doing--she's ignoring the open refrigerator door that wastes electricity and shortens the life of the food in the fridge. Also, the one in her arms looks pretty young--and we do have effective contraception around these days. That makes it likely that irresponsible childbearing has something to do with her plight.


To sum up: Picture #1 looks like someone suffering from external factors, #2 looks like someone suffering from internal factors.

Loren,

Thank you for proving my point.

You just provided a living example of giving the benefit of the doubt to one person and denying that same benefit to the other. Yes the first picture was taken during the Great Depression, but black folk have lived in depression conditions in this country for years measured in scores. As for the child in the refrigerator, do you have some proof that says she isn't simply maneuvering her small body in order to reach something in the back? maybe she asked for something and her mother told her she could get herself.

BTW

the woman in the first picture had a name and a story

 Florence Owens Thompson (September 1, 1903 – September 16, 1983), born Florence Leona Christie, was the subject of Dorothea Lange's photo Migrant Mother (1936), an iconic image of the Great Depression. The Library of Congress titled the image: "Destitute pea pickers in California. Mother of seven children. Age thirty-two. Nipomo, California."

I'll wait for your stump speech on how she shouldn't have had seven children she couldn't afford.

no, wait ...

You have already declared her simply a victim of circumstance. You already gave her the benefit of the doubt. Gee, I wonder why?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Loren,

Thank you for proving my point.

You just provided a living example of giving the benefit of the doubt to one person and denying that same benefit to the other. Yes the first picture was taken during the Great Depression, but black folk have lived in depression conditions in this country for years measured in scores. As for the child in the refrigerator, do you have some proof that says she isn't simply maneuvering her small body in order to reach something in the back? maybe she asked for something and her mother told her she could get herself.

You're looking at the world through discrimination glasses.

The Great Depression affected everybody, the "depression" you refer to exists in an environment that is not a depression. There are jobs to be had, why doesn't she go get one?

As for the refrigerator--look at the woman. If your theory was right I would expect her to be looking at her daughter, not off into space.

BTW

the woman in the first picture had a name and a story

 Florence Owens Thompson (September 1, 1903 – September 16, 1983), born Florence Leona Christie, was the subject of Dorothea Lange's photo Migrant Mother (1936), an iconic image of the Great Depression. The Library of Congress titled the image: "Destitute pea pickers in California. Mother of seven children. Age thirty-two. Nipomo, California."

I'll wait for your stump speech on how she shouldn't have had seven children she couldn't afford.

In an era without good contraception--a big difference.

 

[Bronzeage]

You're looking at the world through discrimination glasses.

The Great Depression affected everybody, the "depression" you refer to exists in an environment that is not a depression. There are jobs to be had, why doesn't she go get one?

As for the refrigerator--look at the woman. If your theory was right I would expect her to be looking at her daughter, not off into space.

BTW

the woman in the first picture had a name and a story

 Florence Owens Thompson (September 1, 1903 – September 16, 1983), born Florence Leona Christie, was the subject of Dorothea Lange's photo Migrant Mother (1936), an iconic image of the Great Depression. The Library of Congress titled the image: "Destitute pea pickers in California. Mother of seven children. Age thirty-two. Nipomo, California."

I'll wait for your stump speech on how she shouldn't have had seven children she couldn't afford.

In an era without good contraception--a big difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_condoms

In 1927, senior medical officers in the American military began promoting condom distribution and educational programs to members of the army and navy. By 1931, condoms were standard issue to all members of the U.S. military.[2]:213–4 This coincided with a steep decline in U.S. military cases of sexually transmitted disease.[2]:217–9 The U.S. military was not the only large organization that changed its moral stance on condoms: in 1930 the Anglican Church's Lambeth Conference sanctioned the use of birth control by married couples. In 1931 the Federal Council of Churches in the U.S. issued a similar statement.[2]:227

 

[AthenaAwakened]

You're looking at the world through discrimination glasses.

The Great Depression affected everybody, the "depression" you refer to exists in an environment that is not a depression. There are jobs to be had, why doesn't she go get one?

As for the refrigerator--look at the woman. If your theory was right I would expect her to be looking at her daughter, not off into space.

BTW

the woman in the first picture had a name and a story

 Florence Owens Thompson (September 1, 1903 – September 16, 1983), born Florence Leona Christie, was the subject of Dorothea Lange's photo Migrant Mother (1936), an iconic image of the Great Depression. The Library of Congress titled the image: "Destitute pea pickers in California. Mother of seven children. Age thirty-two. Nipomo, California."

I'll wait for your stump speech on how she shouldn't have had seven children she couldn't afford.

In an era without good contraception--a big difference.

Loren, you are the gift that keeps on giving.

Where are these jobs? Can she walk to them? Is there public transportation? Does she have a car? Is she in someway physically disabled?

as for contraception, my grandmother had her two children in 1923 and 1924. she wanted no more and had no more. That is the proper response right? If I have a personal anecdote, I can disprove social trends. That is how you do it, right?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You're looking at the world through discrimination glasses.

The Great Depression affected everybody, the "depression" you refer to exists in an environment that is not a depression. There are jobs to be had, why doesn't she go get one?

As for the refrigerator--look at the woman. If your theory was right I would expect her to be looking at her daughter, not off into space.

BTW

the woman in the first picture had a name and a story

 Florence Owens Thompson (September 1, 1903 – September 16, 1983), born Florence Leona Christie, was the subject of Dorothea Lange's photo Migrant Mother (1936), an iconic image of the Great Depression. The Library of Congress titled the image: "Destitute pea pickers in California. Mother of seven children. Age thirty-two. Nipomo, California."

I'll wait for your stump speech on how she shouldn't have had seven children she couldn't afford.

In an era without good contraception--a big difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_condoms

In 1927, senior medical officers in the American military began promoting condom distribution and educational programs to members of the army and navy. By 1931, condoms were standard issue to all members of the U.S. military.[2]:213–4 This coincided with a steep decline in U.S. military cases of sexually transmitted disease.[2]:217–9 The U.S. military was not the only large organization that changed its moral stance on condoms: in 1930 the Anglican Church's Lambeth Conference sanctioned the use of birth control by married couples. In 1931 the Federal Council of Churches in the U.S. issued a similar statement.[2]:227

Keyword: Good.

 

[ksen]

I believe pulling out has been around forever.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I believe pulling out has been around forever.

But that suffers the basketball failure.
Because a man dribbles before he shoots.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I believe pulling out has been around forever.

Keyword: Good.