Should white people be discriminated?

The last thing white people in this country have to fear is being discriminated against

 

You obviously do not live in the real world. Then again, though it is a fact, whites do get discriminated against, they bring the bulk of it upon themselves.

 

Are you serious?

Would you EVER change places with a black man who isn't Tiger Woods in his prime?

 

Rachael Donezal did.

 

I absolutely would.

 

Says she who supports Affirmative Action.

 

"Should white people be discriminated?"
That's a stupid question. You may as well ask if success should be punished, or if we should shoot our own feet. In fact, in multiple aspects of our lives, we are all blessed thru or because of white people.

 

Your inclusion of the tag line might have been accurate, but your summary of why it was accurate was in fact inaccurate since your premise that they produced something "too good" for the competition was totally and completely false.

Actually it was rather relevant to the point, but I'm not surprised you didn't notice.

[The theoretical basis for "anti-racism" is called Critical Race Theory (CRT):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Critical_race_theory#Definition

You are really painting yourself as a sort of "ignorant and proud of it" member of the left. You seem to be totally unaware of the racial dynamics being played out in this country, especially in the Universities. [/quote]

Now that is funny. Seems you can pull out a reference without actually reading that reference and understanding exactly what it is all about.

I see you didn't quote the second paragraph:

Legal scholar Roy L. Brooks has defined CRT as "a collection of critical stances against the existing legal order from a race-based point of view", and says it focuses on the various ways in which the received tradition in law adversely affects people of color not as individuals but as a group. Thus, CRT attempts to analyze law and legal traditions through the history, contemporary experiences, and racial sensibilities of racial minorities in this country. The question always lurking in the background of CRT is this: What would the legal landscape look like today if people of color were the decision-makers?[11]

It isn't a theory of "anti-racism", it is a theory of how "race privilege" is ingrained in the legal and bureaucratic systems.

 

I must be missing something.

WHich group is the beneficiary of "race privilege"?

 

The "race or ethnicity" that holds power.

 

Then how is it, exactly, that Caucasian Americans were a part of The Privileged Class between January 2009 and January 2017 (when a black man--viz., Barack Obama--was POTUS)?

 

Er, you think you wave a magic wand and voila everything is awesome?

Of course I do understand you equate "power" with "president" and ignore congress, federal and state laws, courts, entrenched social perspectives, etc.

Simple superficial nonsensical analysis seems to be prevasive in trumpland.

 

Black people are certainly not barred (by either law or custom) from running for either the Senate or the House. And many--including Maxine Waters and Elijah Cummings (both residing on the far left edge of the political spectrum)--have been elected and re-elected.

As for "federal and state laws," only a true-blue liberal--someone who looks for "disparate impact"--would find our laws (at any level) to be racist nowadays.

And the argument about "entrenched social perspectives" sounds suspiciously like the ranting of liberal, who sees the US as a fundamentally bigoted nation...

Evidently, you do not really wish to discuss the matter rationally, but merely wag an accusing finger at the 62 million-plus who voted for Donald Trump (and who, apparently, stand as a bulwark against your desires)...

 

Yes all shades of america can run for office. Who exactly defines the districts they run in? How many can radically change social attitudes? Why are there organizations like the ACLU and NAACP who consistently fight to uphold those very same "entrenched social perspectives". I'm not at all surprised you equate a universal observation with "liberal ranting", since it foundational problem in dealing with those very same entrenched social perspectives of which many who have them don't notice.

America is a fundamentally bigoted nation. To suggest otherwise is to ignore basic human nature not to mention history and current events.

No, I don't merely wag a finger at Trump voters, I point a finger at them accusing many of them of being ignorant and unthinking relying on emotions and bumperstickers instead of seeking knowledge and understanding of the issues confronting them. Not that the hillary voters cannot be accused of exactly the same thing, but hey they lost and your guy won. And now you see what a clustermuck he is making of it. He has done little to enhance America's standing in the world, and one helluva lot to diminish it - enjoy.

 

This begs the question, by assuming--absent any evidence--that "social attitudes" in America, toward black people, are generally negative.

The NAACP was once a much-needed organization (when there was real bigotry to fight).

The ACLU--well, not so much. (In theory, it seems good enough--just fighting for our "civil liberties"--but, in practice, it is a reliably left-wing organization.)

Certainly, "history" may be appealed to (if you wish to go back to the days of Jim Crow; or even further, to the days of slavery).

But I do not know just what "current events" you have in mind, that would prove that America is "a fundamentally bigoted nation"...

[QUOTE="Jonsa, post: 1067568723, member: 55255[Donald Trump] has done little to enhance America's standing in the world, and one helluva lot to diminish it - enjoy.[/QUOTE]

If, by "enhance America's standing in the world," you mean that he should have "led" by following other nations (as, for instance, with the Paris accords), then I suppose you may have a point.

Well, sorta-kinda, anyway...

 

Wow. Not sure where you live, but your vision of social attitudes in America do not map to actual data.


http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polli...ic-opinion-context-americans-race-police.aspx



http://www.gallup.com/opinion/polli...ic-opinion-context-americans-race-police.aspx


As for "leading" instead of following, I guess you didn't notice that Obama's adminstration LED the negotiations. Imagine an American President able to get every nation on earth to agree to recognize the problem and make commitments to do something about it. I think you should be up at arms at such a naked display of global socialism.

 

Well, since I am white, it does seem reasonable to note that my "vision of social attitudes," vis-à-vis the races, is similar to a plurality--and often a majority--of other white people...

 

Opinion polls are more about perception and people have been programmed, Pavlovian style, to think a certain way.