Majority of White Americans Say They Believe Whites Face Discrimination

[Audacious]

You might not want to use the word "culture" here. They guy who just posted in post #217 has a history of saying that culture is another word for "black people" and is racist.



I'd sure like to hear this excuse being made in front of a judge when they are asked why they stole a car, robbed a convenience store, were out selling drugs on the street corner. It's like saying that they can't make good decisions for their life because of their ancestors being kidnapped and sold to Europeans. What would you think of Christians who would claim that crimes they committed was due to their religious ancestors being arrested and thrown to the lions in Rome? It wouldn't make much sense, would it?

Yeah, the difference being that black people haven't had 2,000 years to recover from oppression and that said oppression is still actively happening.

 

[Aldebaran]

Yeah, the difference being that black people haven't had 2,000 years to recover from oppression and that said oppression is still actively happening.

Define oppression.
Is it defined by being elected as president?
Is it manifested when you get paid tens of millions of dollars to play sports?
Or are you more concerned with hurt feelings when people such as the OP comes onto this site and makes a claim multiple times a day that someone's feelings were hurt and then use their own skin color as a way to label someone else?

Honestly, these claims of oppression are wearing quite thin, and it's no wonder that it's become a source of comedy. Just look at the first post in the following link for some examples. What is Real Racism?

 

[SummerMadness]

Yeah, the difference being that black people haven't had 2,000 years to recover from oppression and that said oppression is still actively happening.

But didn't you realize that black people in any position of power means no oppression exists? Hiram Revels became the first African American senator in 1870, his election clearly shows that since 1870, places like Mississippi have not had any racism.

 

[MoonlessNight]

But didn't you realize that black people in any position of power means no oppression exists? Hiram Revels became the first African American senator in 1870, his election clearly shows that since 1870, places like Mississippi have not had any racism.

Seems to be a pretty conclusive argument when employed to show that white people are never discriminated against.

 

[Audacious]

Define oppression.
Is it defined by being elected as president?
Is it manifested when you get paid tens of millions of dollars to play sports?
Or are you more concerned with hurt feelings when people such as the OP comes onto this site and makes a claim multiple times a day that someone's feelings were hurt and then use their own skin color as a way to label someone else?

Honestly, these claims of oppression are wearing quite thin, and it's no wonder that it's become a source of comedy. Just look at the first post in the following link for some examples.

Oppression is systematic, and obviously not total. In most cases, it's like a doorway; white people get a larger door, and then give black people a much smaller one, so that they can't fit as well.

Others in this thread have mentioned, for instance, how people with "black-sounding names" get fewer callbacks than people with "white-sounding" ones (Adam Smith vs Tyrone Jackson) when the resumes are literally identical in every way but the name of the person. How is that not systematic racism?

It's great that we have black sports stars and Senators, but that doesn't mean that black people do not suffer from oppression.

 

[Aldebaran]

But didn't you realize that black people in any position of power means no oppression exists? Hiram Revels became the first African American senator in 1870, his election clearly shows that since 1870, places like Mississippi have not had any racism.

They must not have ever talked about peanut butter and jelly sandwiches either. Racism like that still exists today!

 

[Audacious]

Seems to be a pretty conclusive argument when employed to show that white people are never discriminated against.

There is little to no systematic racism against white people in the real world.

There may be some exceptions, like hip-hop music, but I don't know enough about that topic to do more than make vague speculations. 99.9% of the time, in the United States, being white is a very helpful thing that is conducive to one's success.

 

[Aldebaran]

Oppression is systematic, and obviously not total. In most cases, it's like a doorway; white people get a larger door, and then give black people a much smaller one, so that they can't fit as well.

That's the sort of reasoning that black people in general could use from here to eternity that their life is so much worse, and it's all because of white people. It's a systematic victim mentality. Not much of an incentive to try to make their own life better, but to sit back and blame others based on skin color.

Others in this thread have mentioned, for instance, how people with "black-sounding names" get fewer callbacks than people with "white-sounding" ones (Adam Smith vs Tyrone Jackson) when the resumes are literally identical in every way but the name of the person. How is that not systematic racism?

It's great that we have black sports stars and Senators, but that doesn't mean that black people do not suffer from oppression.

Short people suffer oppression, fat people suffer oppression, ugly people suffer oppression. Some people just have a harder time in life than others. Whining constantly about any one of them isn't going to change anything. If someone wants to make a change, they can do their part to live their life in a way that changes the way people feel about them. But playing the victim won't accomplish that.

 

[Aldebaran]

There is little to no systematic racism against white people in the real world.

Except in the real "black world". But that's considered not important simply because blacks are a minority. If they lived in a place where they were the majority and whites were the minority, would we be talking about "black privilege"?

There may be some exceptions, like hip-hop music, but I don't know enough about that topic to do more than make vague speculations. 99.9% of the time, in the United States, being white is a very helpful thing that is conducive to one's success.

There may some truth to that among many white people.

 

[Audacious]

Except in the real "black world". But that's considered not important simply because blacks are a minority.

A lot of black people are anti-black and anti-semitic, and of course some are anti-white. But all of these groups are small minorities (10% or under) among black people in the US.

If they lived in a place where they were the majority and whites were the minority, would we be talking about "black privilege"?

If white people suffered in this place the same way black people do here, and for the same reasons, then of course we would.

 

[Ana the Ist]

If it results in black people receiving callbacks for jobs at a significantly lower rate, then it is structural racism.

Or it's just a conclusion that is essentially a guess by a couple of sociologists...

This study concludes that white, black, and even latino "sounding" names are treated equally.

Hiring bias study: Resumes with black, white, Hispanic names treated the same

Sociology has, unfortunately, become a results-driven field of study when it should be based on facts. The way that many sociologists practice it today...I wouldn't even call science.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Again, they are normal names. The only people to blame are the racists.

"Normal" is a relative standard. They may be normal to you, but not necessarily to the employers in the study. Also...

If it results in black people receiving callbacks for jobs at a significantly lower rate, then it is structural racism.

What "structure" are you referring to here? A hiring process wherein employers are able to see the names of applicants?

 

[Ana the Ist]

A lot of black people are anti-black and anti-semitic, and of course some are anti-white. But all of these groups are small minorities (10% or under) among black people in the US..

Where did you come up with that number?

 

[Barney]

"Normal" is a relative standard. They may be normal to you, but not necessarily to the employers in the study. Also...

If I sent out resumes to Israeli companies with nazi vs. Jewish names, guess who wouldn't get callbacks? It's very easy to create bogus studies.

The experiment referred to in which whites names got more call backs could easily be influenced by the choice of companies. Do the same experiment with companies low in blacks, like all tech companies, the black names would get the callbacks.

I realize lying racists don't really care about the truth, but the "same" black vs. white name resume with Harvard as the school is not really the same. Ivy league schools are are infamous or massive black preferences (proved by SAT scores), and any competent employers knows this. If he's looking for the best from Harvard, all other things being equal, it's far and away the white name. The problem isn't discrimination against blacks at companies, but discrimination against whites at Harvard which devalue the resumes of blacks.

Also consider the names themselves. What if a kid is named Adolph Hitler, would you want to hire him over someone else with an identical resume? That's the same thing as when you use militant black
names. How about racially neutral names, like Mike Jackson, but with photos of the applicants dressed identically? (Except, it's odd to send photos, so what.) And use non-ivy league schools on the resumes.

 

[SummerMadness]

If I sent out resumes to Israeli companies with nazi vs. Jewish names, guess who wouldn't get callbacks? It's very easy to create bogus studies.

There is no such thing as a Nazi name. Are you suggesting that Israeli companies discriminate against German names? You're doing your best to find a reason to justify racism, it's just not working.

And again, you're stating things without providing evidence... you attack data and scientific studies, while providing no data or scientific studies to back up your wild statements.

 

[Aldebaran]

If white people suffered in this place the same way black people do here, and for the same reasons, then of course we would.

Then it's all about the past after all. I wonder how many years or centuries will have to go by before black people can say they don't require special treatment in order to own a business, occupy high government positions, earn millions of dollars as sports figures and celebrities, or even become the president of the country they believe is so racist against them.

 

[Ana the Ist]

If I sent out resumes to Israeli companies with nazi vs. Jewish names, guess who wouldn't get callbacks? It's very easy to create bogus studies.

The experiment referred to in which whites names got more call backs could easily be influenced by the choice of companies. Do the same experiment with companies low in blacks, like all tech companies, the black names would get the callbacks.

I realize lying racists don't really care about the truth, but the "same" black vs. white name resume with Harvard as the school is not really the same. Ivy league schools are are infamous or massive black preferences (proved by SAT scores), and any competent employers knows this. If he's looking for the best from Harvard, all other things being equal, it's far and away the white name. The problem isn't discrimination against blacks at companies, but discrimination against whites at Harvard which devalue the resumes of blacks.

Also consider the names themselves. What if a kid is named Adolph Hitler, would you want to hire him over someone else with an identical resume? That's the same thing as when you use militant black
names. How about racially neutral names, like Mike Jackson, but with photos of the applicants dressed identically? (Except, it's odd to send photos, so what.) And use non-ivy league schools on the resumes.

I think the most important factor left out is the possibility that uncommon white names, like Gareth for example, get just as few call backs as the uncommon black names.

The study could reflect nothing more than a simple "in-group" bias towards names that employers are more familiar with.

 

[Audacious]

Then it's all about the past after all. I wonder how many years or centuries will have to go by before black people can say they don't require special treatment in order to own a business, occupy high government positions, earn millions of dollars as sports figures and celebrities, or even become the president of the country they believe is so racist against them.

The implication that the majority of black people can't be oppressed because some of them are able to become sports stars or presidents is ridiculous. Especially since that was the first black president after a string of 42 white ones.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Then it's all about the past after all. I wonder how many years or centuries will have to go by before black people can say they don't require special treatment in order to own a business, occupy high government positions, earn millions of dollars as sports figures and celebrities, or even become the president of the country they believe is so racist against them.

It's funny how some claim the U.S. is a "white supremacist" nation...or that we've "institutionalized racism"...or that "white privilege" has given all whites massive advantages over blacks...

....yet somehow, there's a lot of highly successful, well educated, and influential black people at every level of U.S. society.

 

[Aldebaran]

The implication that the majority of black people can't be oppressed because some of them are able to become sports stars or presidents is ridiculous. Especially since that was the first black president after a string of 42 white ones.

Then how many presidents with black skin have to be voted into office as president before the accusations of oppression (as a race) stops? How many black people have to be celebrities and politicians? How many need to become millionaires and billionaires? The more I see black people succeeding, the less credibility the idea of them being "oppressed" has.