Does white privilege exist in the US?

[disciple Clint]

If one grows up with a disadvantage, then one is disadvantaged. It’s not “claiming a victim status” to not be able to keep up with people who have a much easier time succeeding.

That would be valid if everyone who had the same conditions experienced the same lack of success but that is not the case.

 

[Sparagmos]

That would be valid if everyone who had the same conditions experienced the same lack of success but that is not the case.

Being disadvantaged doesn’t mean that any number of good things can’t happen that may allow success, or that someone who is born with exceptional talent or drive won’t have an easier time. It simply means disadvantaged. People born into poverty are less likely to be successful, period.

 

[stevil]

I never said anything about affirmative action, so I don't know what your post has to do with mine.

The OP of this thread was all about "white priviledge" and "affirmative action"

Your first post had in it

You can still win if you're black and lose if you're white, but if you're white, your chances of winning are significantly higher.

I responded to your post showing that I disagreed with you on that particular point.

A poor unconnected white person can have less opportunities than a poor unconnected black person, because of affirmative action.
The affirmative action bit was my point. I never said it was anything that you said.

 

[disciple Clint]

Being disadvantaged doesn’t mean that any number of good things can’t happen that may allow success, or that someone who is born with exceptional talent or drive won’t have an easier time. It simply means disadvantaged. People born into poverty are less likely to be successful, period.

Our nation was built by people who born into poverty. It is not uncommon for people to come to this country and rise from poverty to financial success.

 

[BNR32FAN]

Really? How?

Well for me, first hand experience. I’ve lived in both areas but post 139 also confirms this.

 

[KCfromNC]

Advantages may have some cultural links to them, but I think it really boils down to individual choices of both parents and children.

For example, as the study in post 56 shows, choosing to not to pick a "white-sounding" name for their child is a choice parents make which means their child is less likely to get job interviews.

No one else could possibly be at fault in such a situation. It is strictly about the "cultural" aspects of a certain minority group.

Probably has something to do with thug culture or rap music, too.

 

[SilverBear]

Your logical fallacy is burden of proof

If you can't prove it....it's only logical to disregard it.

evidence that a problem exists? This thread is full of such evidence. You don't like it so you disregard it but that isn't logical at all is it?

 

[SilverBear]

Wrong

try demonstrating your position is true rather than just denying reality

 

[SilverBear]

That would be valid if everyone who had the same conditions experienced the same lack of success but that is not the case.

Evidence?

 

[SilverBear]

Our nation was built by people who born into poverty. It is not uncommon for people to come to this country and rise from poverty to financial success.

only 4 % of those born into poverty will ever make it out and become that "financial success" Ref 'Moving on Up' Pew Charitable Trust study of Poverty 2013

 

[SilverBear]

Well for me, first hand experience. I’ve lived in both areas but post 139 also confirms this.

Post 139 contains false assumptions that don't hold up, See post #153

 

[KCfromNC]

Yes, that happens. I thought I mentioned that whites have an advantage in other hiring situations in that very post.

Just wanted to introduce a bit of actual data the discussion.

 

[RocksInMyHead]

A poor unconnected white person can have less opportunities than a poor unconnected black person, because of affirmative action.
The affirmative action bit was my point. I never said it was anything that you said.

Three things:
1. The OP did not appear to have a clear understanding of what "white privilege" meant, so my post was meant as a basic explanation of the concept, not a comprehensive breakdown of all possible scenarios.

2. After saying that you don't think we should look at things on the basis of an individual (which I did not), you're looking at things on the basis of an individual. Affirmative action is not afforded equally or universally.

3. Affirmative action only applies in certain situations. It might lead to a poor black student getting into a college he otherwise never would have - and over a poor white student - but, in general, poor white students also get a boost to their college admission chances. Colleges like to admit students who have dealt with hardships and/or come from disadvantaged school districts, regardless of race. And it means nothing in other aspects of life. There is no affirmative action in police interactions or homebuying, and its effects on employment are debatable (see previous posts about the effects of "whitewashing" a resume).

 

[bèlla]

Yes, I can see there is a difference. But I think my point is still illustrated. I grew up lower middle class, and one things my parents instilled in me was a deep and humble awareness of the fact that many kids didn’t have what we have, and not to take what we had for granted. Perhaps that was a middle class oblige LOL.

Did you get the starving kids spiel at dinner? Especially if you didn't like your options.

Anyway, as someone who learned about the concept of white privilege from educators, that is very much how it is taught and how it feels.

I've never heard the term before coming here. I don't know anyone who talks like that. Nor did I hear it in the classroom.

Is Noblesse oblige about guilt though, or just awareness?

Legacy. Awareness would be the polite response. But ethos is more accurate.

The problem comes in when you go around “accusing” others of white privilege instead of looking simply at oneself, and when it is misrepresented and mischaracterized by people who don’t understand the concept.

Noblesse oblige is older and isn't offensive. White privilege evokes a different spirit and often causes offense to the hearer. The term is loaded and misused by many. Hence the reactions.

Yours in His Service,

~bella

 

[98cwitr]

For example, as the study in post 56 shows, choosing to not to pick a "white-sounding" name for their child is a choice parents make which means their child is less likely to get job interviews.

No one else could possibly be at fault in such a situation. It is strictly about the "cultural" aspects of a certain minority group.

Probably has something to do with thug culture or rap music, too.

But are those perceptions based in reality or is it simply a false (or perhaps true) assumption?

Such premises reminded me of a tweet from Ms. Klacik from a few days ago.

Not all black people prescribe themselves to "thug [pro-crime] culture" and some of all races do. Therefore, to categorize race and culture is to miss the mark.

 

[rturner76]

First of all....I've never said anything was anyone's fault for being stupid. You made that up completely.

Secondly, if you're interested in disparities....why aren't we looking at disparities between asians and blacks on all those issues? They're even bigger than the disparity between whites and blacks.

Thirdly, why are we looking at disparities at all? If we look at outcomes for the 1st and 2nd born sons of families....they're wildly different. 40+% of CEOs are firstborn. 2nd born sons have lower educational outcomes and are more likely to go to prison.

That's despite the fact that they grow up in the same families, go to the same schools, etc.

I suppose we could assume that 1st born sons are oppressing 2nd born sons....

Or you know, you don't have any clue what you're talking about.

Yes you are correct, there are other disparities. In families of multiple children, there a "typical" roles that develop between siblings. The oldest child is most often the "hero" or "mascot." Often in large families, the eldest child becomes responsible for their younger siblings. They become almost like an "assistant manager" of the family doling out discipline, making bro and sis do their chores, telling them to be quiet when mom has a headache. Protecting them from bullies. Giving "love advice" etc. It basically can train them to think like a manager organically.

Then there are the other roles kids fall into like the "scapegoat" who is often the middle child. The "peacemaker" who can be anyone but is often the youngest. Of course, there are other roles and they aren't always determined by birth order. Also, in European culture, especially Western Europe, any inheritance left by the parents would go to the eldest child. This was done to keep the family's "fortune" in tact and not divide it up, making it a smaller inheritance for the next generation. So for millennia, the oldest child has been born into leadership and I believe they are typically expected to achieve more.

The disparity between whites and minorities is similar as there has been a type of inheritance passed down since colonization and before. This does not mean that all white people have been given an advantage. It just means, they like all races, are more likely to be accepted by other white people. Not all business owners and/or managers are white however, there are more white males in upper management, CEO, and board of director positions. A white male will likely feel more comfortable and compatible with another white male (also within that, people who are Irish are more comfortable with Irish, German, English and so on).

It's not that all of these white people in positions of power are evil racists (though plenty are), it's just an inheritance type thing that people from the same place feel related on a certain level and they will look after their own. The old man hires a protege he feels is most like him to take over his position when he retires.

Do you think all of this is nonsense? Do you agree with anything I am saying here?

 

[com7fy8]

That's how affirmative action works in the United States. It purports to exist to even the playing field and help disadvantaged people of color, but in reality it discriminates against white people, including genuinely disadvantaged white people. It's very unfair. And people say "white privilege" exists.

Yes, there can be affirmative action. But this is considered to be needed . . . because of how white privilege does exist.

 

[Sparagmos]

Our nation was built by people who born into poverty. It is not uncommon for people to come to this country and rise from poverty to financial success.

Sure, it happens. But overall our country does not have good upward mobility the way it used to.

Long-term decline in intergenerational mobility in the United States since the 1850s

Clearly people born into the middle class have more advantages than people born into poverty. That’s indisputable. People who “overcome the odds” don’t change that fact.

 

[BNR32FAN]

The median income for families that live in mobile homes is about $30,000 a year. Ref Washington Post Feb 2019
Then median income for families living in poverty is $19,000 a year Ref the Health and Human Services Department

That’s completely irrelevant because the median income for blacks is well above $19,000. Between $30-$45k depending on what site your looking at.

 

[bèlla]

Such premises reminded me of a tweet from Ms. Klacik from a few days ago.

I heard the same growing up and so did my daughter.

Talk white
Dress white
Act white
Wanna be white

The notion is toxic and meant to impart a sense of shame and wrongness upon the intended. And challenge their cultural identity in the process.

Yours in His Service,

~bella