White Fragility.

Perhaps I got that "claptrap" from your claptrap.
By who's definition are you considered a "reasonable person"....your own?
Thanks for the opinion

 

Nope, obviously you are not a person who can actually understand what was posted.

My apologies for thinking you were.

 

accepted

 

Why are you assuming that black descendants of slaves in America feel "shame" versus feeling righteously indignant? If anything, Americans as a culture felt shame for ever condoning slavery, even though slavery was a global phenomenon. Many cultures owned slaves including wealthy black Africans buying/selling/owning other, poorer, black Africans. America (England and Europe) have done more to try to remedy the injustice while some other countries still own slaves today.

Poor people are often considered "less than" wealthier people. It's not a race issue. We have generational poor white people who have a culture where people are shunned, chastised, or outcast for trying to get and education and leave the poverty behind them. That is not terribly different from some small percentage of poor black communities where trying to get a better education and getting out of poverty is looked down upon by their own community. Achievers get insulted by their community as "acting white" or get a "shameful" label of "Uncle Tom".

Some segments of American culture, both black and white, have a psychological bent to hold back their own. The main difference is that the "backwards" white cultures live spread out in sparsely populated rural areas and get scoffed at as hicks and "Hillbillies" (see Appalachia), while anti-education pockets in black culture live in more densely-populated urban centers and get political sympathy for being "oppressed by white people".

The people we're talking about represent a small percentage of Americans, but to have media tell it, the entire story line is of "White people as a whole are systemically oppressing black people as a whole". That is a extreme oversimplification of a very complex issue, to the point of being very paternalistic and condescending toward black America.

 

If you aren't careful, she'll tell you to have a nice day, right before she runs away from the discussion.

 

Give me an example of a country which functions efficiently without money. If you can't find one, then give me an example of a country where individuals don't want more money versus wanting less money.

Democrats want to take away the money you earned through your hard work and give it to people who voted for them to take away your money and give it to them. It's legal to take your money if government does it; whereas if poor people took what you have directly from you, it would be called robbery.

 

Everyone so race obsessed nowadays, how sad

 

"Everything's connected___Everything changes___Pay attention."

 

I guess the word "extremist" (which is thrown back and forth by both parties) comes to mind. If it applies to alcohol or drugs...
it's called addiction. Some call it a disease. Either way, it can be hazardous to your health and those around you.
The same can be said of money and power. At what point should it be considered a disease? And how should it be dealt with?

Likewise it has been said Republicans..."want to take away the money you earned through your hard work and give it to people who voted for them to take away your money and give it to them."
Tax breaks given to businesses, don't always or maybe even seldom, go to create jobs....they may go to automation

 

In just a few decades past Blacks were systematically excluded by law from such things as the GI Bill for education and both VA and FHA loans for housing. These things have been corrected but their baleful influence remains and it is totally unrealistic to expect that won't continue for many years. These are only two examples and none of these legal Jim Crow exclusions ever applied to Asians

Blacks were systematically and often by law excluded from American prosperity and treated as a created underclass, an actual caste within American society.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/01/magazine/isabel-wilkerson-caste.html

 

Unsupportable nonsense. Whoever told you this, lied.

 

I don't know. You tell me. Should there be an upper-limit on earnings, after which someone just gives 100% to the government?

Should Bernie Sanders, who made 6-figures a year sitting around Congress for decades as the only fringe Socialist, and not writing any significant legislation, own three homes?

After Socialism recently became fashionable and trendy, Sanders made over a million on a book he wrote. If he hadn't been who he is and Socialism had not become the fashion of the day, the book would never have become a best seller. Should he give the million to the government just because he thinks "rich people" should give most of their money to the government, so the government can give it to the poor. He bought another vacation home and he is not going to give any more than he owes. Nor did he increase any charitable donations in scale to his windfall profits.

Sanders used Socialism to be a successful capitalist and become a "self-made" millionaire. Is that a disease? I think it's a pretty good gig if you can get it, and could only happen in America.

Sanders:

 

If there is, exactly no one will make more than that upper limit.

 

Know your history. This country has done some pretty crazy racist things...in the past.



We have come a long way as a country, and yes, can still improve continuously. However, to suggest that "White Fragility" is currently maintaining some underclass is off target and an oversimplification of a problem which is more sociology-economic across races than about racial differences.

The wealth divide between the rich and poor (across races) did start getting wider in the 1990's during the Clinton administration when the Democrat party became neo-liberal globalists and told the middle-class that their jobs would not be harmed "too much" by international trade agreements with foreign countries. They were wrong. Middle-class jobs have been stripped by both parties and sent overseas. The divide is not about "all white people" oppressing "all black people". Don't be distracted. Keep your eye on the ball.

There is only one party which is quickly reforming to bring jobs back to the U.S. and protect those jobs. Jobs, education, and ample opportunity lifts everyone with one iota of motivation to succeed, and provides a healthy GDP to offer a safety net to the weak and elderly. Nationalists crashed the Republican party with votes and demands for more work in America on American soil. Marxists and Socialists have crashed the Democrat party promising free money from rich-to-poor instead of jobs. In the latter case, businesses are dis-incentivized to invest, hire and produce, the money runs out pretty quickly, and more people are left wanting for basic provisions.

This whole "White Fragility" non-sense is just a distraction. Today's biggest problem is not racism.

 

WHITE PRIVILEGE: Inherent advantages possessed by White people on the basis of their RACE in a society characterized by racial inequality and injustice.
There. That's the definition of White privilege. In a system of White privilege it doesn't matter how smart you are or how hard you work, if you're not White. Because everything is geared toward White people.
You're welcome.

 

Your definition, then, renders the term moot as the US is not a society characterized by racial inequality and injustice.

 

Of course. The USA is a perfect country, always has been. Thank you.
Take care and have a nice day.

 

I don't know you. I do know what White privilege is. Scroll up.

 

I'm sorry you don't like the truth, but the truth it remains.

What did I say, just a few posts ago?

If you aren't careful, she'll tell you to have a nice day, right before she runs away from the discussion.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/white-fragility.574621/page-26#post-1071934102

I accept your concession.

 

You do... but you apparently refuse to accept that, according to your own definition, it does not exist here.

 

Some extraordinarily intelligent black thought leaders disagree with your racist theory. (And they are Trump-hating liberals, too.)

There. You're welcome.

 

It's a good thing White Privilege does not exist. Otherwise there would be zero successful blacks, zero successful Hispanics, zero successful Asians, etc, in America today. But in your leftist, "feel good" tagline without any substantiated fact, you actually did hit on the solution to succeeding, regardless of skin color. Works every time. I bolded it.

 

Then why do you keep claiming I have had some kind of privilege over you, are you saying all white people are the same, that's pretty bigoted. What if I said all black people are the same?

 

I have asked you to tell me what privilege I have over you because I am white and you said you don't know me so you can't tell me. You deal realize the conflict in all your statements here?

What specifically is "geared towards white people" in this country and be specific. If EVERYTHING is geared towards whites then how come I deal with lots of high level black people in my business dealings?

 

Joe Biden just said black people are the same. Again. Today. On mainstream media. LOL

Now "African Americans" is trending on Twitter.