White privilege poll.

[ruby sparks]

I don't think you can understand white privilege without incorporating the study of socioeconomic class. Absent class issues, the "white race" and "black race" would never have been invented to begin with. It is and always was a cynical idea, meant to divide the working poor against each one another and stave off rebellion against the aristocracy. The true power brokers have enough education to know that biology doesn't really work the way folk taxonomies of race would have you believe (and it shows, when you look at how they treat impoverished whites) but when you have a considerable economic stake in the perpetuation of a bad idea, it's not hard to convince yourself of it.

At the risk of teeing away from the main OP......

I do agree, of course. Well, up to a point. I don't think any aristocracy invented racism. They may have exploited it however.

I did not claim that they invented racism, only the specific concepts of "black" and "white" classes in particular. And it was absolutely weatlhy academics who invented, defined, and pushed those concepts. There was no folk concept of inherent blackness or whitness before slavery became an integral component to the colonial economy of Europe.

Getting back to this. We might disagree (in particular about the last sentence) but I would still be interested to read evidence of how wealthy academics cynically invented and defined the two classes in order to divide the working poor. It's not something I'm familiar with specifically. I wouldn't be much surprised at all if it happened, nor reluctant to accept it, but in its entirety it is a sort of conspiracy theory so I'd just like to see evidence, and not merely a plausible theory.

 

[bigfield]

Sorry. Still confused. Do you mean you accept the general case but are asking how does toni know the reasons and factors in her specific individual case? Why would that be important?

I think this discussion has ended up in a different context for me than everyone else, which is why people think I'm denying that white privilege exists.

I original wrote this:

"Small", "moderate" and "large" don't mean much to me, so I just went with large.

I wrote a few paragraphs explaining my choice, but I didn't think it would persuade anyone of anything.

The problem with the concept of white privilege is that it's a sociological phenomenon: you can see its effect across groups of people, but you can't definitely say how racial privilege affected the path some particular person's life took at some particular juncture. If you can't explain the effect of white privilege to people in terms of personal stories, then a lot of people just won't be convinced that it's real.

Toni disagreed:

Oh, I disagree that it is impossible to see how white privilege affected individual people by telling their stories. My own family is a case in point: My grandparents and parents were poor during the Great Depression. My generation are all very solidly middle to upper middle class, in one generation. Largely because we were unburdened by the color of our skins. Heck, our country is rife with the stories of powerful, almost exclusively white people who are born into poverty and yet succeed beyond anyone's wildest dreams. It's The American Dream.

My questions are only getting at one point: just-so stories aren't convincing. Perhaps instead of asking "how do you know" I should have asked "how will your audience know?"

If that's a stupid or unimportant point, or if I've explained it poorly, or if it's just too meta, then cool, whatever.

 

[ruby sparks]

My questions are only getting at one point: just-so stories aren't convincing. Perhaps instead of asking "how do you know" I should have asked "how will your audience know?"

Whether or not in Toni's family's specific case this or that factor played this or that part, it would not change the general picture, surely. And also, if Toni assumed that an audience already understood the basics about the effects of racism, I'm not sure that's Toni's problem. I might even go as far as to say that it might be something of a disgrace on the part of a reader who does not by now understand, given how widely available and accepted the known facts are (about the past I mean, including much of the 20th C). Even only on this forum, the evidence has been presented numerous times, and one would have to almost live in a hole in the ground not to be exposed to it outside this forum.

I'm glad you asked me to go back and read your first post because I did get you wrong about this.

 

[Toni]

How do I know? As a young child, my family was poor. I attended college on academic scholarships. As a young adult, I barely had enough money to pay rent and to eat--frankly not enough to eat every day and certainly not 3 meals. No matter where I went, into any department store or government building or whatever: I was always treated as though I belonged. My presence was never questioned. Only one time was I ever taken for a sales clerk, in an upscale department store where all of the salesclerks actually dressed far better than I ever could have.

My friends who were black? Were followed around stores, were questioned and harassed and treated as though they did not really belong, did not really deserve their place wherever it was.

If I put on my nice clothes and shoes, fix my hair, put on a little makeup and stroll.....anywhere: no one will think I don't belong. No one will think that I did not always have the money to afford the nice clothes on my back and shoes on my feet.

What happened to your black friends? Did they join the middle class, as your family did, or are they still part of the working class? It seems like the only way this story has a point is if they failed where you succeeded. Not only did people disrespect them because they were black, but that it stopped them from getting middle class jobs.

My family moved to another town when I was 7. I have no idea what happened to them. There was one boy whose name was unusual and I was able to look him up on Facebook. He apparently became a janitor. It was weird that I recognized him so many decades later.

 

[Politesse]

I did not claim that they invented racism, only the specific concepts of "black" and "white" classes in particular. And it was absolutely weatlhy academics who invented, defined, and pushed those concepts. There was no folk concept of inherent blackness or whitness before slavery became an integral component to the colonial economy of Europe.

Getting back to this. We might disagree (in particular about the last sentence) but I would still be interested to read evidence of how wealthy academics cynically invented and defined the two classes in order to divide the working poor. It's not something I'm familiar with specifically. I wouldn't be much surprised at all if it happened, nor reluctant to accept it, but in its entirety it is a sort of conspiracy theory so I'd just like to see evidence, and not merely a plausible theory.

It wasn't a conspiracy (nothing was secret about it) but it was complicated and took a century to build. Race theory and race law grew up together as suceeding generations of landowners, scholars, and judges sought to justify intellectually what capitalistic avarice and Protestant industry were demanding of the Caribbean, Brazil and Virginia: increasingly severe and hopeless forms of chattel slavery, justified by a pseudo-scientifically supported reinvention of religious concepts of race. And it was very, very cynical, and grounded in the necessity of convincing the population that the inherent condition of indentured Europeans and enslaved Africans was and should be different.

 

[ruby sparks]

I did not claim that they invented racism, only the specific concepts of "black" and "white" classes in particular. And it was absolutely weatlhy academics who invented, defined, and pushed those concepts. There was no folk concept of inherent blackness or whitness before slavery became an integral component to the colonial economy of Europe.

Getting back to this. We might disagree (in particular about the last sentence) but I would still be interested to read evidence of how wealthy academics cynically invented and defined the two classes in order to divide the working poor. It's not something I'm familiar with specifically. I wouldn't be much surprised at all if it happened, nor reluctant to accept it, but in its entirety it is a sort of conspiracy theory so I'd just like to see evidence, and not merely a plausible theory.

It wasn't a conspiracy (nothing was secret about it) but it was complicated and took a century to build. Race theory and race law grew up together as suceeding generations of landowners, scholars, and judges sought to justify intellectually what capitalistic avarice and Protestant industry were demanding of the Caribbean, Brazil and Virginia: increasingly severe and hopeless forms of chattel slavery, justified by a pseudo-scientifically supported reinvention of religious concepts of race.

I don't suppose there's a handy article I could peruse? Not to worry. Google is my friend. I'm always saying that to others so I should say it to myself.

ETA: see below.

 

[ruby sparks]

Found something already that will get me started:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/race/#HisConRac

There's a section on the History of the Concept of Race.

Nothing much as first skim about it being done in order to divide the poor........but I haven't read it yet.

 

[Gospel]

I admit, my view lends itself to being insensitive to the impact racism still has on minority groups today. However, systematic racism is not as written (by law) supported by the system yet because it was supported by laws in the past, many white people made gains from it that are still enjoying those gains today and will for the near future. It's going to take time and persistence for the playing field to level. However it will level out only because systematic racism no longer exists as written by law.

(my bold)

This thread is specifically on the question of white privilege though. Somewhat related to the other one about racism, I admit, but also slightly separate.

...many white people made gains from it that are still enjoying those gains today and will for the near future...

I think at least some (probably not all) of those gains would be in the form of advantages that amount to privileges.

This is going to be a bit cynical. Lets say our sun represents White privilege. If the sun were to vanish it would take 8 minutes before the last light to reaches us. During those 8 minutes we'd think the sun exists because we still see the light but we'd be wrong because the source is gone. The last light from white privileged (which was vanquished by law) is still shining on us. I suggest waiting 9 minutes to pass as only then will we see that white privilege is gone.

 

[ruby sparks]

(my bold)

This thread is specifically on the question of white privilege though. Somewhat related to the other one about racism, I admit, but also slightly separate.



I think at least some (probably not all) of those gains would be in the form of advantages that amount to privileges.

This is going to be a bit cynical. Lets say our sun represents White privilege. If the sun were to vanish it would take 8 minutes before the last light to reaches us. During those 8 minutes we'd think the sun exists because we still see the light but we'd be wrong because the source is gone. The last light from white privileged (which was vanquished by law) is still shining on us. I suggest waiting 9 minutes to pass as only then will we see that white privilege is gone.

Not necessarily cynical, but maybe not the best analogy. As I said, the existence of laws on paper does not tend to vanquish the things they proscribe, even if they act as a partial and helpful brake.

How about if we say that the sun has given you a skin condition that persists, even if in a lesser way, after you stop going out in the sun.

Seriously though, in such things the effects will carry on as legacies, even if the original causes cease (which I'm not sure they even have, even though they have lessened, which is good, and has to be acknowledged, and credit given).

 

[Politesse]

(my bold)

This thread is specifically on the question of white privilege though. Somewhat related to the other one about racism, I admit, but also slightly separate.



I think at least some (probably not all) of those gains would be in the form of advantages that amount to privileges.

This is going to be a bit cynical. Lets say our sun represents White privilege. If the sun were to vanish it would take 8 minutes before the last light to reaches us. During those 8 minutes we'd think the sun exists because we still see the light but we'd be wrong because the source is gone. The last light from white privileged (which was vanquished by law) is still shining on us. I suggest waiting 9 minutes to pass as only then will we see that white privilege is gone.

And to the people who have been waiting fifty-five years for the light to pass with no sign of its doing so?

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Oh, I disagree that it is impossible to see how white privilege affected individual people by telling their stories. My own family is a case in point: My grandparents and parents were poor during the Great Depression. My generation are all very solidly middle to upper middle class, in one generation. Largely because we were unburdened by the color of our skins. Heck, our country is rife with the stories of powerful, almost exclusively white people who are born into poverty and yet succeed beyond anyone's wildest dreams. It's The American Dream.

Bomb asked the inevitable question: how do you know?

One can speculate that, if your grandparents were black, then you, your siblings and cousins would not be middle/upper-middle class. But to imagine that alternate family history, one has to believe that blacks face socioeconomic barriers that whites do not. And if your audience already believes that, then you're just preaching to the choir.

Toni is talking in the first instance about past generations, in particular the early to mid-20th C (her parents and grandparents generations). It's well documented and accepted that blacks routinely faced numerous barriers during that time, to the point that only a denialist could query it with a straight face.

Who would be the denialist here?

 

[Gospel]

(my bold)

This thread is specifically on the question of white privilege though. Somewhat related to the other one about racism, I admit, but also slightly separate.



I think at least some (probably not all) of those gains would be in the form of advantages that amount to privileges.

This is going to be a bit cynical. Lets say our sun represents White privilege. If the sun were to vanish it would take 8 minutes before the last light to reaches us. During those 8 minutes we'd think the sun exists because we still see the light but we'd be wrong because the source is gone. The last light from white privileged (which was vanquished by law) is still shining on us. I suggest waiting 9 minutes to pass as only then will we see that white privilege is gone.

And to the people who have been waiting fifty-five years for the light to pass with no sign of its doing so?

We'll keep on keeping on. You know; continue using sun screen and sip lemonade in the shade until then.

 

[Toni]

(my bold)

This thread is specifically on the question of white privilege though. Somewhat related to the other one about racism, I admit, but also slightly separate.



I think at least some (probably not all) of those gains would be in the form of advantages that amount to privileges.

This is going to be a bit cynical. Lets say our sun represents White privilege. If the sun were to vanish it would take 8 minutes before the last light to reaches us. During those 8 minutes we'd think the sun exists because we still see the light but we'd be wrong because the source is gone. The last light from white privileged (which was vanquished by law) is still shining on us. I suggest waiting 9 minutes to pass as only then will we see that white privilege is gone.

Why do you think that 'white privilege vanished by law?'

 

[skepticalbip]

(my bold)

This thread is specifically on the question of white privilege though. Somewhat related to the other one about racism, I admit, but also slightly separate.



I think at least some (probably not all) of those gains would be in the form of advantages that amount to privileges.

This is going to be a bit cynical. Lets say our sun represents White privilege. If the sun were to vanish it would take 8 minutes before the last light to reaches us. During those 8 minutes we'd think the sun exists because we still see the light but we'd be wrong because the source is gone. The last light from white privileged (which was vanquished by law) is still shining on us. I suggest waiting 9 minutes to pass as only then will we see that white privilege is gone.

Why do you think that 'white privilege vanished by law?'

Law created and enforced 'black privilege' with mandatory racial quotas and 'hate crime laws' something like fifty years ago. This pretty much eliminated 'white privilege'. However 'tribalism' among all identifiable groups (whites, blacks, asians, etc.) still exists and likely will as long as there are identifiable groups.

 

[ruby sparks]

Law created and enforced 'black privilege' with mandatory racial quotas and 'hate crime laws' something like fifty years ago. This pretty much eliminated 'white privilege'.

Some people might not realise this is satire.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Related, yes, but not interconnected.

You must think you are making some kind of point, but I'm baffled as to what. How could race and class be related but not interconnected?

Because neither causes the other.

 

[skepticalbip]

Law created and enforced 'black privilege' with mandatory racial quotas and 'hate crime laws' something like fifty years ago. This pretty much eliminated 'white privilege'.

Some people might not realise this is satire.

It was intentionally a bit satirical but satire is generally a reductio ad absurdum intended to make a point.

Personal experience: In the late 1970s I applied for a job at a large company (AT&T). The hirer told me that he wold like to keep my application on file for some future opening because I was the most qualified applicant but he couldn't hire me for the position they were trying to fill because a minority was needed to meet the mandated quota. My 'white privilege' didn't help me.

A few weeks later, I got a call from them telling me that they had a new opening but I had already found another job at a different company.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Oh, I disagree that it is impossible to see how white privilege affected individual people by telling their stories. My own family is a case in point: My grandparents and parents were poor during the Great Depression. My generation are all very solidly middle to upper middle class, in one generation. Largely because we were unburdened by the color of our skins. Heck, our country is rife with the stories of powerful, almost exclusively white people who are born into poverty and yet succeed beyond anyone's wildest dreams. It's The American Dream.

Bomb asked the inevitable question: how do you know?

One can speculate that, if your grandparents were black, then you, your siblings and cousins would not be middle/upper-middle class. But to imagine that alternate family history, one has to believe that blacks face socioeconomic barriers that whites do not. And if your audience already believes that, then you're just preaching to the choir.

Toni is talking in the first instance about past generations, in particular the early to mid-20th C (her parents and grandparents generations). It's well documented and accepted that blacks routinely faced numerous barriers during that time, to the point that only a denialist could query it with a straight face.

But past barriers do not stop people in the present. To the extent that there is a lasting effect it's attitudes passed from parent to child. The problem is that that is very hard to address, while pretending it's discrimination provides an easy fix and a ready-made bad guy to pay for it.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why do you think that 'white privilege vanished by law?'

Law created and enforced 'black privilege' with mandatory racial quotas and 'hate crime laws' something like fifty years ago. This pretty much eliminated 'white privilege'. However 'tribalism' among all identifiable groups (whites, blacks, asians, etc.) still exists and likely will as long as there are identifiable groups.

There always will be groups. If not by race then by other factors.

 

[Toni]

Related, yes, but not interconnected.

You must think you are making some kind of point, but I'm baffled as to what. How could race and class be related but not interconnected?

Because neither causes the other.

Prejudices about race certainly do lead to differences in socioeconomic status.

Prejudices about class perpetuate class differences.