"White privilege" and "implicit bias" talk from Democratic POTUS candidates is toxic

[ericson00]

As we try to fight racism, we all know that people of color face obstacles white people do not; such as being suspected of or assumed to be guilty of things whites are not necessarily assumed to be guilty of, being thought of us likely less smarter than whites, and many other indignities.

I salute the pundits and Democratic surrogates who speak out against racism. However, this lesson taught us, I think, that demographics are not necessarily destiny, at least pertaining to future elections. Changing demographics is an exogenous event. Furthermore, more Hispanics are seeing themselves as white, which throws a huge wrench in the “wait until demographics move, and we can just loaf” strategy.

As of now, the vast majority of America is white, as are the populations of swing states a Democrat needs to win to reach 270 electoral college votes.

Does a coal miner in West Virginia feels privileged? Does a Wal Mart patron living in a trailer somewhere in the FL panhandle feel privileged? Does a person with $100000 in student loans feel privileged?

We got to frame this the right way. While its important to acknowledge racism in this country’s history, rubbing past eras of blacks and other POC being oppressed by whites in the face of the majority of the electorate is a great way to elect people like Donald Trump and fan white resentment. Its also not going to undo the past oppression either.

One way to achieve the dual goals of fighting racism while alienating fewer people is instead of using the term “white privilege,” use terms like “majority privilege” or “minority handicap.” It takes the guilt-implication out of it, so more people are comfortable talking about race overall. We cannot cast a majority of America as guilty of something.

Also, it doesn’t help anything when people try to cast the US as uniquely racist compared to other societies. Its both false, makes Democrats look unpatriotic, and ferments division. In every society on Earth, the members of a society’s ethnic, racial, and religious majority face fewer obstacles than they would if they weren’t members of those majorities. In China, non-Han Chinese miss out on things that come easier to Han Chinese. France, Protestants see discrimination; in Mexico, indigenous people and Afros face things whites and Mestizos don’t, Brazil’s has some severe race relations, and in Zimbabwe, its very hard to be white these days. The list goes on forever.

Also, about the Native Americans, its important to note that other large nations, like China, Russia, and many others got to their size by people conquering indigenous and dispersed tribes. Nonetheless, they did this for land. The aforementioned examples were not indisputably genocides, like The Holocaust, Armenian Genocide, Tutsi Genocide, and others, which were pre-planned, pre-ordained, and tended to happen very fast. Fact its both a legitimate scholarly debate that has smart people on both sides, and working class whites without college degrees are just not gonna nor do they wanna hear about it. So drop that talk from the discourse, as WWCs don’t like seeing Columbus Day or Washington Redskins trashed; they see it as an assault on the culture they know and is traditional. Once again, no one really gains from fighting things like Columbus Day and Redskins. It makes progressives look out of touch with regular folk. When progressives fight these culture wars, they only trade principle for goals that would’ve been attainable and tangible, with real future benefits.

Some progressives say stuff like “but if America is truly exceptional, why can’t we beat ‘white privilege?” Because while we can work towards helping the electorate’s majority see other races, ethnicities, and adherents of different religions as equal, we cannot force them to think of them as such by fiat. “American exceptionalism” has never meant “thought police.” “American exceptionalism” is about America’s role in preserving a better global order than existed before WWII, better than other alternatives, so progressives ought to stop trying to appropriate the term to Critical Race theory.

Some think Hillary Clinton pushed identity politics too much in 2016. She did, but it didn’t begin with her. The Democratic Party’s push towards identity politics has been an Obama-era phenomena which Hillary would’ve had a tough time fighting, tho I think she should’ve tried harder. Her 2008 campaign would probably have done her good this year. Sadly, that Bernie ran made her have to "prove" she wasn't conservative, scrub the progmoderate label, and since he stole the economic progressivism lane, she had to take the identity politics lane and then double down when he wouldn't just get out of the way.

Also, Bernie Sanders was and is not the solution. One of my huge problems with him is that his DNC appointee Cornel West was the number one pusher of “white privilege,” and Critical Race theory. That stuff may be legitimate academic material, but as 2016 has shown me, Democratic candidates, surrogates, and advocates on TV need to avoid Critical Theory talk, and do it fast.

We must fight minority handicap. Only with better framing can we get better Presidents and better Congresses.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. What a bunch of claptrap.

But you might want to see if the National Review is interested in publishing it.

[FrenchieCat]

2. "White privilege" and "implicit bias"

are facts.

Facts are not toxic, they are truth.

[ericson00]

3. but President Donald Trump is more toxic

and if not mentioning "facts" such as "white privilege" and "implicit bias" would've helped beaten him, who here would've passed it up?

[lunasun]

4. No no and no and how the hell do more black Hispanics identify being white?

You want to trade principle for goals with benefits you say Mr. zero zero .

[Starry Messenger]

5. Well, Hillary wouldn't agree with you.

And politely, wtf?

"Also, about the Native Americans, its important to note that other large nations, like China, Russia, and many others got to their size by people conquering indigenous and dispersed tribes. Nonetheless, they did this for land. The aforementioned examples were not indisputably genocides, like The Holocaust, Armenian Genocide, Tutsi Genocide, and others, which were pre-planned, pre-ordained, and tended to happen very fast."

Hitler based his strategy on the American treatment of Native Americans, let's just start there. http://www.jewishjournal.com/sacredintentions/item/hitlers_inspiration_and_guide_the_native_american_holocaust

" Hitler's concept of concentration camps as well as the practicality of genocide owed much, so he claimed, to his studies of English and United States history. He admired the camps for Boer prisoners in South Africa and for the Indians in the wild west; and often praised to his inner circle the efficiency of America's extermination—by starvation and uneven combat—of the red savages who could not be tamed by captivity.

He was very interested in the way the Indian population had rapidly declined due to epidemics and starvation when the United States government forced them to live on the reservations. He thought the American government's forced migrations of the Indians over great distances to barren reservation land was a deliberate policy of extermination." <-----pro-tip, yes it was.

[Starry Messenger]

8. Um, that is a right-wing publication.

Last edited Thu Nov 17, 2016, 02:40 PM - Edit history (1)

It's listed under wikipedia as a neoconservative journal. No thanks. If you are using that stuff to inform your limited worldview, than we are pretty much done here.

Edit--I see someone alerted and it got removed. FTR, it was a link to Commentary magazine.

[Ken Burch]

6. Could you just go to the list of things you DON'T want us to move sharply to the right about?

Remember, if we aren't at least slightly more progressive than we were in '92 and '96, we will have no reason to exist as a party, because we won't be able to do anything that matters if we do win.

[duffyduff]

9. White dude privilege is real

Get a clue, please.

These dudes who voted for Trump are unintelligent. They cannot be reasoned with because they were raised to think they are entitled to the best jobs, to the American dream, because of their skin color and their dicks.

They are hopeless. They haven't been our base for decades. They need to be cut loose and wither away.

[Tarheel_Dem]

10. B.S.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

11. Would someone be so kind to explain how acknowledging white privilege...

... helps anyone?

I never heard it explained until I came to DU. This is one of the most cited explanations for it that I've seen:
http://nationalseedproject.org/white-privilege-unpacking-the-invisible-knapsack

Most of it pertains to benefits for people who are a majority. So what's the solution?

Not having children? (Check.) Killing myself? (Not checked yet.)

I'm not trying to compare my past struggles to those of racial minorities with the following example, especially but not exclusively because it was a temporary issue, but there was a period in my childhood when I had bright red hair and freckles. I was mistreated by several of my fellow students (and even some teachers) during that time, and it was mostly because I looked different. I was often told that I was "ugly" by other students, and teachers who overheard it were more likely to snicker than take any action. Yet I saw teachers jump to the defense of minorities and overweight kids if similar ridicule was directed at them.

Would a large presentation in my elementary school gymnasium about the injustice of treating "gingers" differently have helped me? Maybe in some cases. I strongly suspect, however, that the worst bullies would have worked even harder to diminish me after such a thing.