CDZ What is White Privilege?

[LoneLaugher]

One glaring example to anyone who is the child of a WWII veteran who grew up during the Great Depression is the fact that black veterans were denied GI Bill benefits.....especially those related to home loans.

This led to a disparity in home ownership between white and black veterans that directly impacted wealth building for poor and lower class American men throughout the postwar era.

The chance that a black person born in the 50's or 60's to a US army veteran would have a home to inherit in the 80's or 90's was considerably lower than that of white children of vets.

Thus......the white experience moved to the suburbs.....where property taxes built excellent public schools for white kids to attend. The black kids didn't experience this shift.

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/44333/276173994.pdf

It still applies today. Driving While Black is alive and well in NYC under the Bloomberg administration. DeBlasio is looking to rescind it.

Driving While Black by Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody The Washington Monthly

January/ February 2014Driving While Black
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows how police target African Americans on highways across America.

By Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody

If there’s one issue that won Bill de Blasio the New York Democratic mayoral primary in September, on his way to a crushing 74 percent to 24 percent victory in the November general election, it was his full-throated opposition to “stop and frisk.” Under this policy, police officers stop, question, and frisk people they deem suspicious, usually with zero evidence that they’ve committed a crime. De Blasio’s predecessor Michael Bloomberg and his GOP election opponent Joe Lhota strongly defended stop and frisk, arguing that it helps reduce the crime rate. But the voters of New York had clearly had enough of a policy that, in practice, overwhelmingly targets minorities, especially young blacks, only a tiny fraction of whom are ever found to be carrying drugs, or a gun, or indeed to have done anything wrong at all.

What few Americans (or at least white Americans) know is that stop and frisk is not limited to New York City. Versions of the policy are in place across the country. And just as in New York, whatever crime-fighting benefits derive from the policy come at the expense of contravening basic American principles of equal treatment under the law and of angering law-abiding minority citizens whose support and cooperation the police need to fight crime.​

If ever there was an example of current day "white privilege" this has to be it.

If you want to stop violent crime you scrutinize where the violent crime is. If that happens to be among the black community then the qualification of such a stop and frisk program, if done simply by looking at high risk areas, is race neutral. It may have a disparate impact on the black community, but blacks commit a disparate amount of the crime in New York City

(See HERE http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf )

So the policy is race neutral. The only privilege whites have here is to be living in an area where black crime is not as effective. But that is hardly an argument for "white privilege." If the privilege you speak of is that whites do not act as deviant as blacks then you should call it "Black self destruction," not "white privilege." White privilege assumes an unearned status. Are you saying that whites have an unearned status due to black deviance? That may be true, but whites did not create that status for whites. Blacks created it for them via "black self destruction."

You stopped being serious. Enjoy your day.

That post was totally serious. Where was it not?

You are ignoring the history of the matter......wrapped in white privilege....that led to the environment that you are citing as the major reason for the disparity in arrests. It is odd...especially since I've already addressed it.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

One glaring example to anyone who is the child of a WWII veteran who grew up during the Great Depression is the fact that black veterans were denied GI Bill benefits.....especially those related to home loans.

This led to a disparity in home ownership between white and black veterans that directly impacted wealth building for poor and lower class American men throughout the postwar era.

The chance that a black person born in the 50's or 60's to a US army veteran would have a home to inherit in the 80's or 90's was considerably lower than that of white children of vets.

Thus......the white experience moved to the suburbs.....where property taxes built excellent public schools for white kids to attend. The black kids didn't experience this shift.

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/44333/276173994.pdf

It still applies today. Driving While Black is alive and well in NYC under the Bloomberg administration. DeBlasio is looking to rescind it.

Driving While Black by Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody The Washington Monthly

January/ February 2014Driving While Black
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows how police target African Americans on highways across America.

By Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody

If there’s one issue that won Bill de Blasio the New York Democratic mayoral primary in September, on his way to a crushing 74 percent to 24 percent victory in the November general election, it was his full-throated opposition to “stop and frisk.” Under this policy, police officers stop, question, and frisk people they deem suspicious, usually with zero evidence that they’ve committed a crime. De Blasio’s predecessor Michael Bloomberg and his GOP election opponent Joe Lhota strongly defended stop and frisk, arguing that it helps reduce the crime rate. But the voters of New York had clearly had enough of a policy that, in practice, overwhelmingly targets minorities, especially young blacks, only a tiny fraction of whom are ever found to be carrying drugs, or a gun, or indeed to have done anything wrong at all.

What few Americans (or at least white Americans) know is that stop and frisk is not limited to New York City. Versions of the policy are in place across the country. And just as in New York, whatever crime-fighting benefits derive from the policy come at the expense of contravening basic American principles of equal treatment under the law and of angering law-abiding minority citizens whose support and cooperation the police need to fight crime.​

If ever there was an example of current day "white privilege" this has to be it.

If you want to stop violent crime you scrutinize where the violent crime is. If that happens to be among the black community then the qualification of such a stop and frisk program, if done simply by looking at high risk areas, is race neutral. It may have a disparate impact on the black community, but blacks commit a disparate amount of the crime in New York City

(See HERE http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf )

So the policy is race neutral. The only privilege whites have here is to be living in an area where black crime is not as effective. But that is hardly an argument for "white privilege." If the privilege you speak of is that whites do not act as deviant as blacks then you should call it "Black self destruction," not "white privilege." White privilege assumes an unearned status. Are you saying that whites have an unearned status due to black deviance? That may be true, but whites did not create that status for whites. Blacks created it for them via "black self destruction." So its not a privilege at all. Its simply a result of behaving themselves better than others. That, my friend, is earned.

Your own link exposes that you are wrong,

The 2010 Census listed NYC racial demographics as White 44.6%, Blacks 25.1% and Hispanics 27.5%.

Demographics of New York City - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Your link for Stop and Frisk;

View attachment 34495

Only 11% of whites stopped and frisked even though they make up 44% of the population of NYC.

White privilege is on display right there.

Now your disingenuous attempt to deflect by claiming that blacks live in higher crime areas is yet another example of white privilege. Too bad you are blind to the obvious in that regard. Whites are privileged to live in lower crime areas. If there was no white privilege then the statistics would be the same across all race groups.

Ahh... so 'population' is the issue?

Or is the issue, 'crime' and 'the potential for such'.

Now, in terms of crime? What percentage of those crimes do white New Yorkers comprise?

 

[ricechickie]

White privilege allows the white person to be seen through the lens of their actions, not the lens of their race.

White privilege is what makes me less likely than black people to be followed through a store.

White privilege is what is invoked when I get stopped at a checkpoint, and even though I'm missing my front license plate, I'm let go with, "Take care of that," rather than "Pull over and we'd like to search your car."

White privilege is what causes a teacher to be more forgiving of a white kid who is "having a tough day", and recommend suspension for the same actions from a black kid.

White privilege is what you experience when people don't lock their car doors when you walk by.

White privilege is what you experience when your application is actually looked at by someone who matters, due to the lack of a "black-sounding name."

White privilege is being told, "Great work!" for a job well done, instead of people muttering behind your back that it was probably affirmative action.

White privilege is not worrying that a police officer might decide that you look suspicious.

White privilege is when I walk down the street, and I'm pretty damned sure some white driver isn't constructing a narrative that I'm walking slowly on purpose, because I think he owes me reparations. <<<<<<<<<This one is my personal favorite, as a person on USMB actually told me this.

White privilege means that I'm more likely to be helped out in an emergency by bystanders than a black person.

Edit: After reading the Washington Post piece, I was reminded that white privilege means that if a cop sees you running to your car or running into your house, or running just about ANYWHERE, the cop will simply assume you are in a hurry, and not that you're fleeing the scene of a crime.

 

[LoneLaugher]

There may have been "white privilege" at one time in US society but that went by the way of the dinosaur beginning with civil rights legislation.

Our oil is derived from dinosaurs. Shit has a way of lingering.....evolving......having an impact on the future.

You know...like kids having college educated grandparents are more likely to have college educated parents......land are more likely to be college bound. When your grandparents were given the shaft in the public education system due to their race and, later, the fact that schools that black kids went to were underfunded when compared to those for white kids ( suburban vs urban ).....,you don't have college educated grandparents.

 

[Publius1787]

One glaring example to anyone who is the child of a WWII veteran who grew up during the Great Depression is the fact that black veterans were denied GI Bill benefits.....especially those related to home loans.

This led to a disparity in home ownership between white and black veterans that directly impacted wealth building for poor and lower class American men throughout the postwar era.

The chance that a black person born in the 50's or 60's to a US army veteran would have a home to inherit in the 80's or 90's was considerably lower than that of white children of vets.

Thus......the white experience moved to the suburbs.....where property taxes built excellent public schools for white kids to attend. The black kids didn't experience this shift.

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/44333/276173994.pdf

It still applies today. Driving While Black is alive and well in NYC under the Bloomberg administration. DeBlasio is looking to rescind it.

Driving While Black by Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody The Washington Monthly

January/ February 2014Driving While Black
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows how police target African Americans on highways across America.

By Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody

If there’s one issue that won Bill de Blasio the New York Democratic mayoral primary in September, on his way to a crushing 74 percent to 24 percent victory in the November general election, it was his full-throated opposition to “stop and frisk.” Under this policy, police officers stop, question, and frisk people they deem suspicious, usually with zero evidence that they’ve committed a crime. De Blasio’s predecessor Michael Bloomberg and his GOP election opponent Joe Lhota strongly defended stop and frisk, arguing that it helps reduce the crime rate. But the voters of New York had clearly had enough of a policy that, in practice, overwhelmingly targets minorities, especially young blacks, only a tiny fraction of whom are ever found to be carrying drugs, or a gun, or indeed to have done anything wrong at all.

What few Americans (or at least white Americans) know is that stop and frisk is not limited to New York City. Versions of the policy are in place across the country. And just as in New York, whatever crime-fighting benefits derive from the policy come at the expense of contravening basic American principles of equal treatment under the law and of angering law-abiding minority citizens whose support and cooperation the police need to fight crime.​

If ever there was an example of current day "white privilege" this has to be it.

If you want to stop violent crime you scrutinize where the violent crime is. If that happens to be among the black community then the qualification of such a stop and frisk program, if done simply by looking at high risk areas, is race neutral. It may have a disparate impact on the black community, but blacks commit a disparate amount of the crime in New York City

(See HERE http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf )

So the policy is race neutral. The only privilege whites have here is to be living in an area where black crime is not as effective. But that is hardly an argument for "white privilege." If the privilege you speak of is that whites do not act as deviant as blacks then you should call it "Black self destruction," not "white privilege." White privilege assumes an unearned status. Are you saying that whites have an unearned status due to black deviance? That may be true, but whites did not create that status for whites. Blacks created it for them via "black self destruction." So its not a privilege at all. Its simply a result of behaving themselves better than others. That, my friend, is earned.

Your own link exposes that you are wrong,

The 2010 Census listed NYC racial demographics as White 44.6%, Blacks 25.1% and Hispanics 27.5%.

Demographics of New York City - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Your link for Stop and Frisk;

View attachment 34495

Only 11% of whites stopped and frisked even though they make up 44% of the population of NYC.

White privilege is on display right there.

Now your disingenuous attempt to deflect by claiming that blacks live in higher crime areas is yet another example of white privilege. Too bad you are blind to the obvious in that regard. Whites are privileged to live in lower crime areas. If there was no white privilege then the statistics would be the same across all race groups.

Blacks commit over 50% of the murders in NYC. Whites commit less than 10% of the murders in NYC. Once again, see here >>>> http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf

So whites are over represented in Your stop and frisk model and blacks are underrepresented. But hey, no ones perfect. They got it close enough. As I said before, you scrutinize the areas with the most crime. Blacks commit the overwhelming majority of violent crime in NYC. So when the crime analyst looks at a map of high risk areas he is more likely to see the black areas to be more high risk. But his high risk map doesn't show race, only risk. That's race neutral. Your not going to tie up your limited law enforcement resources to combat crime in low crime areas equally as high crime areas. Thus, your search everyone the same theory has been laid to rest.

 

[Derideo_Te]

One glaring example to anyone who is the child of a WWII veteran who grew up during the Great Depression is the fact that black veterans were denied GI Bill benefits.....especially those related to home loans.

This led to a disparity in home ownership between white and black veterans that directly impacted wealth building for poor and lower class American men throughout the postwar era.

The chance that a black person born in the 50's or 60's to a US army veteran would have a home to inherit in the 80's or 90's was considerably lower than that of white children of vets.

Thus......the white experience moved to the suburbs.....where property taxes built excellent public schools for white kids to attend. The black kids didn't experience this shift.

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/44333/276173994.pdf

It still applies today. Driving While Black is alive and well in NYC under the Bloomberg administration. DeBlasio is looking to rescind it.

Driving While Black by Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody The Washington Monthly

January/ February 2014Driving While Black
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows how police target African Americans on highways across America.

By Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody

If there’s one issue that won Bill de Blasio the New York Democratic mayoral primary in September, on his way to a crushing 74 percent to 24 percent victory in the November general election, it was his full-throated opposition to “stop and frisk.” Under this policy, police officers stop, question, and frisk people they deem suspicious, usually with zero evidence that they’ve committed a crime. De Blasio’s predecessor Michael Bloomberg and his GOP election opponent Joe Lhota strongly defended stop and frisk, arguing that it helps reduce the crime rate. But the voters of New York had clearly had enough of a policy that, in practice, overwhelmingly targets minorities, especially young blacks, only a tiny fraction of whom are ever found to be carrying drugs, or a gun, or indeed to have done anything wrong at all.

What few Americans (or at least white Americans) know is that stop and frisk is not limited to New York City. Versions of the policy are in place across the country. And just as in New York, whatever crime-fighting benefits derive from the policy come at the expense of contravening basic American principles of equal treatment under the law and of angering law-abiding minority citizens whose support and cooperation the police need to fight crime.​

If ever there was an example of current day "white privilege" this has to be it.

If you want to stop violent crime you scrutinize where the violent crime is. If that happens to be among the black community then the qualification of such a stop and frisk program, if done simply by looking at high risk areas, is race neutral. It may have a disparate impact on the black community, but blacks commit a disparate amount of the crime in New York City

(See HERE http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf )

So the policy is race neutral. The only privilege whites have here is to be living in an area where black crime is not as effective. But that is hardly an argument for "white privilege." If the privilege you speak of is that whites do not act as deviant as blacks then you should call it "Black self destruction," not "white privilege." White privilege assumes an unearned status. Are you saying that whites have an unearned status due to black deviance? That may be true, but whites did not create that status for whites. Blacks created it for them via "black self destruction." So its not a privilege at all. Its simply a result of behaving themselves better than others. That, my friend, is earned.

Your own link exposes that you are wrong,

The 2010 Census listed NYC racial demographics as White 44.6%, Blacks 25.1% and Hispanics 27.5%.

Demographics of New York City - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Your link for Stop and Frisk;

View attachment 34495

Only 11% of whites stopped and frisked even though they make up 44% of the population of NYC.

White privilege is on display right there.

Now your disingenuous attempt to deflect by claiming that blacks live in higher crime areas is yet another example of white privilege. Too bad you are blind to the obvious in that regard. Whites are privileged to live in lower crime areas. If there was no white privilege then the statistics would be the same across all race groups.

Blacks commit over 50% of the murders in NYC. Whites commit less than 10% of the murders in NYC. Once again, see here >>>> http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf

So whites are over represented in Your stop and frisk model and blacks are underrepresented. But hey, no ones perfect. They got it close enough. As I said before, you scrutinize the areas with the most crime. Blacks commit the overwhelming majority of violent crime in NYC. So when the crime analyst looks at a map of high risk areas he is more likely to see the black areas to be more high risk. But his high risk map doesn't show race, only risk. That's race neutral. Your not going to tie up your limited law enforcement resources to combat crime in low crime areas equally as high crime areas. Thus, your search everyone the same theory has been laid to rest.

LL is right. You are not taking your own OP seriously. Then again I was right not to expect any honesty and integrity from you either.

Have a nice day.

/unsubscribe

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

Parting commentary.......

I taught my black kids that their elite upbringing would protect them from discrimination. I was wrong. - The Washington Post

White upper class parents don't need to give their boys a set of rules like that.

Keep denying the existence if you like. But please know.....accepting the facts is not an admission on your part that you personally haven't accomplished anything. Just that you caught a few more breaks and dealt with less bullshit along the way. Don't take everything so personally and it's easier to see clearly.

Again, the Washington Post is used as a means to promote the myth...

Demonstrating once again that the WaPo is an agent of the lie.

Blacks commit a disproportionate amount of crime, establishing that blacks are disproportionately PRONE TOWARD BEING UNWORTHY OF TRUST.

A status which bring unenviable consequences, not the least of which is that one's privileges are starkly REDUCED.

That is what is called natural law... and you may not like it, because of those unenviable consequences, but popular whimsy is not a concern of nature.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

One glaring example to anyone who is the child of a WWII veteran who grew up during the Great Depression is the fact that black veterans were denied GI Bill benefits.....especially those related to home loans.

This led to a disparity in home ownership between white and black veterans that directly impacted wealth building for poor and lower class American men throughout the postwar era.

The chance that a black person born in the 50's or 60's to a US army veteran would have a home to inherit in the 80's or 90's was considerably lower than that of white children of vets.

Thus......the white experience moved to the suburbs.....where property taxes built excellent public schools for white kids to attend. The black kids didn't experience this shift.

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/44333/276173994.pdf

It still applies today. Driving While Black is alive and well in NYC under the Bloomberg administration. DeBlasio is looking to rescind it.

Driving While Black by Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody The Washington Monthly

January/ February 2014Driving While Black
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows how police target African Americans on highways across America.

By Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody

If there’s one issue that won Bill de Blasio the New York Democratic mayoral primary in September, on his way to a crushing 74 percent to 24 percent victory in the November general election, it was his full-throated opposition to “stop and frisk.” Under this policy, police officers stop, question, and frisk people they deem suspicious, usually with zero evidence that they’ve committed a crime. De Blasio’s predecessor Michael Bloomberg and his GOP election opponent Joe Lhota strongly defended stop and frisk, arguing that it helps reduce the crime rate. But the voters of New York had clearly had enough of a policy that, in practice, overwhelmingly targets minorities, especially young blacks, only a tiny fraction of whom are ever found to be carrying drugs, or a gun, or indeed to have done anything wrong at all.

What few Americans (or at least white Americans) know is that stop and frisk is not limited to New York City. Versions of the policy are in place across the country. And just as in New York, whatever crime-fighting benefits derive from the policy come at the expense of contravening basic American principles of equal treatment under the law and of angering law-abiding minority citizens whose support and cooperation the police need to fight crime.​

If ever there was an example of current day "white privilege" this has to be it.

If you want to stop violent crime you scrutinize where the violent crime is. If that happens to be among the black community then the qualification of such a stop and frisk program, if done simply by looking at high risk areas, is race neutral. It may have a disparate impact on the black community, but blacks commit a disparate amount of the crime in New York City

(See HERE http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf )

So the policy is race neutral. The only privilege whites have here is to be living in an area where black crime is not as effective. But that is hardly an argument for "white privilege." If the privilege you speak of is that whites do not act as deviant as blacks then you should call it "Black self destruction," not "white privilege." White privilege assumes an unearned status. Are you saying that whites have an unearned status due to black deviance? That may be true, but whites did not create that status for whites. Blacks created it for them via "black self destruction." So its not a privilege at all. Its simply a result of behaving themselves better than others. That, my friend, is earned.

Your own link exposes that you are wrong,

The 2010 Census listed NYC racial demographics as White 44.6%, Blacks 25.1% and Hispanics 27.5%.

Demographics of New York City - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Your link for Stop and Frisk;

View attachment 34495

Only 11% of whites stopped and frisked even though they make up 44% of the population of NYC.

White privilege is on display right there.

Now your disingenuous attempt to deflect by claiming that blacks live in higher crime areas is yet another example of white privilege. Too bad you are blind to the obvious in that regard. Whites are privileged to live in lower crime areas. If there was no white privilege then the statistics would be the same across all race groups.

Blacks commit over 50% of the murders in NYC. Whites commit less than 10% of the murders in NYC. Once again, see here >>>> http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf

So whites are over represented in Your stop and frisk model and blacks are underrepresented. But hey, no ones perfect. They got it close enough. As I said before, you scrutinize the areas with the most crime. Blacks commit the overwhelming majority of violent crime in NYC. So when the crime analyst looks at a map of high risk areas he is more likely to see the black areas to be more high risk. But his high risk map doesn't show race, only risk. That's race neutral. Your not going to tie up your limited law enforcement resources to combat crime in low crime areas equally as high crime areas. Thus, your search everyone the same theory has been laid to rest.

LL is right. You are not taking your own OP seriously. Then again I was right not to expect any honesty and integrity from you either.

Have a nice day.

/unsubscribe

Well that is a wonderful means of conceding that as far as you're concerned, 'White Privilege' is a myth fraudulently perpetrated by a deceitful cult, as a means to influence the ignorant!

And THAT concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

 

[Publius1787]

One glaring example to anyone who is the child of a WWII veteran who grew up during the Great Depression is the fact that black veterans were denied GI Bill benefits.....especially those related to home loans.

This led to a disparity in home ownership between white and black veterans that directly impacted wealth building for poor and lower class American men throughout the postwar era.

The chance that a black person born in the 50's or 60's to a US army veteran would have a home to inherit in the 80's or 90's was considerably lower than that of white children of vets.

Thus......the white experience moved to the suburbs.....where property taxes built excellent public schools for white kids to attend. The black kids didn't experience this shift.

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/44333/276173994.pdf

It still applies today. Driving While Black is alive and well in NYC under the Bloomberg administration. DeBlasio is looking to rescind it.

Driving While Black by Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody The Washington Monthly

January/ February 2014Driving While Black
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows how police target African Americans on highways across America.

By Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody

If there’s one issue that won Bill de Blasio the New York Democratic mayoral primary in September, on his way to a crushing 74 percent to 24 percent victory in the November general election, it was his full-throated opposition to “stop and frisk.” Under this policy, police officers stop, question, and frisk people they deem suspicious, usually with zero evidence that they’ve committed a crime. De Blasio’s predecessor Michael Bloomberg and his GOP election opponent Joe Lhota strongly defended stop and frisk, arguing that it helps reduce the crime rate. But the voters of New York had clearly had enough of a policy that, in practice, overwhelmingly targets minorities, especially young blacks, only a tiny fraction of whom are ever found to be carrying drugs, or a gun, or indeed to have done anything wrong at all.

What few Americans (or at least white Americans) know is that stop and frisk is not limited to New York City. Versions of the policy are in place across the country. And just as in New York, whatever crime-fighting benefits derive from the policy come at the expense of contravening basic American principles of equal treatment under the law and of angering law-abiding minority citizens whose support and cooperation the police need to fight crime.​

If ever there was an example of current day "white privilege" this has to be it.

If you want to stop violent crime you scrutinize where the violent crime is. If that happens to be among the black community then the qualification of such a stop and frisk program, if done simply by looking at high risk areas, is race neutral. It may have a disparate impact on the black community, but blacks commit a disparate amount of the crime in New York City

(See HERE http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf )

So the policy is race neutral. The only privilege whites have here is to be living in an area where black crime is not as effective. But that is hardly an argument for "white privilege." If the privilege you speak of is that whites do not act as deviant as blacks then you should call it "Black self destruction," not "white privilege." White privilege assumes an unearned status. Are you saying that whites have an unearned status due to black deviance? That may be true, but whites did not create that status for whites. Blacks created it for them via "black self destruction."

You stopped being serious. Enjoy your day.

That post was totally serious. Where was it not?

You are ignoring the history of the matter......wrapped in white privilege....that led to the environment that you are citing as the major reason for the disparity in arrests. It is odd...especially since I've already addressed it.

Indeed, I thought that's what your argument was.

So, if that is the case we must be getting worse off, not better with respect to privilege. Black single parenthood is hovering around 73%, a feat never reached even during the days of Jim Crow. The majority of AIDS cases in the US are African American. Are we to attribute this to white privilege? Are we to attribute this to lack of black education? Blacks are more educated today than they have ever been before. They have more freedom today than ever before in the US. So what's with all the illegitimate births? 3 of 4 black children are born to a single parent. White privilege did not do that.

On that same note, whites have gone up to around 25% illegitimacy. But they cant blame it on someone's privilege. They can blame it on the hyper sexualized culture they bought into but not someone's privilege. The same is true for blacks.

What happened between Jim Crow and today where blacks find their women giving birth to children they cannot afford to raise or educate? Should we go back to Jim Crow? That CANNOT be the answer. The fault lies with black culture itself where illegitimacy has become the rule rather than the exception. So you can point to historic discrimination all you want, however, it is a lame excuse for the actions that hinder blacks today.

I lived in a black neighborhood growing up. I went to 90% black schools. I was poorer than dirt and made fun of by the black kids who ate free lunch (My parents refused to get on the public dole as a matter of principle so I didn't get free lunch) for wearing cheap cloths and "talking white." I was often jumped by mobs of blacks looking for nothing more than someone to beat up. I later enlisted in the Marines and turned out fine. Why can't they?

 

[Alex.]

There may have been "white privilege" at one time in US society but that went by the way of the dinosaur beginning with civil rights legislation.

Our oil is derived from dinosaurs. Shit has a way of lingering.....evolving......having an impact on the future.

You know...like kids having college educated grandparents are more likely to have college educated parents......land are more likely to be college bound. When your grandparents were given the shaft in the public education system due to their race and, later, the fact that schools that black kids went to were underfunded when compared to those for white kids ( suburban vs urban ).....,you don't have college educated grandparents.

Of course it has an impact of the future which was one reason for Civil Rights legislation.

 

[Publius1787]

One glaring example to anyone who is the child of a WWII veteran who grew up during the Great Depression is the fact that black veterans were denied GI Bill benefits.....especially those related to home loans.

This led to a disparity in home ownership between white and black veterans that directly impacted wealth building for poor and lower class American men throughout the postwar era.

The chance that a black person born in the 50's or 60's to a US army veteran would have a home to inherit in the 80's or 90's was considerably lower than that of white children of vets.

Thus......the white experience moved to the suburbs.....where property taxes built excellent public schools for white kids to attend. The black kids didn't experience this shift.

http://dspace.mit.edu/bitstream/handle/1721.1/44333/276173994.pdf

It still applies today. Driving While Black is alive and well in NYC under the Bloomberg administration. DeBlasio is looking to rescind it.

Driving While Black by Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody The Washington Monthly

January/ February 2014Driving While Black
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows how police target African Americans on highways across America.

By Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody

If there’s one issue that won Bill de Blasio the New York Democratic mayoral primary in September, on his way to a crushing 74 percent to 24 percent victory in the November general election, it was his full-throated opposition to “stop and frisk.” Under this policy, police officers stop, question, and frisk people they deem suspicious, usually with zero evidence that they’ve committed a crime. De Blasio’s predecessor Michael Bloomberg and his GOP election opponent Joe Lhota strongly defended stop and frisk, arguing that it helps reduce the crime rate. But the voters of New York had clearly had enough of a policy that, in practice, overwhelmingly targets minorities, especially young blacks, only a tiny fraction of whom are ever found to be carrying drugs, or a gun, or indeed to have done anything wrong at all.

What few Americans (or at least white Americans) know is that stop and frisk is not limited to New York City. Versions of the policy are in place across the country. And just as in New York, whatever crime-fighting benefits derive from the policy come at the expense of contravening basic American principles of equal treatment under the law and of angering law-abiding minority citizens whose support and cooperation the police need to fight crime.​

If ever there was an example of current day "white privilege" this has to be it.

If you want to stop violent crime you scrutinize where the violent crime is. If that happens to be among the black community then the qualification of such a stop and frisk program, if done simply by looking at high risk areas, is race neutral. It may have a disparate impact on the black community, but blacks commit a disparate amount of the crime in New York City

(See HERE http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf )

So the policy is race neutral. The only privilege whites have here is to be living in an area where black crime is not as effective. But that is hardly an argument for "white privilege." If the privilege you speak of is that whites do not act as deviant as blacks then you should call it "Black self destruction," not "white privilege." White privilege assumes an unearned status. Are you saying that whites have an unearned status due to black deviance? That may be true, but whites did not create that status for whites. Blacks created it for them via "black self destruction." So its not a privilege at all. Its simply a result of behaving themselves better than others. That, my friend, is earned.

Your own link exposes that you are wrong,

The 2010 Census listed NYC racial demographics as White 44.6%, Blacks 25.1% and Hispanics 27.5%.

Demographics of New York City - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Your link for Stop and Frisk;

View attachment 34495

Only 11% of whites stopped and frisked even though they make up 44% of the population of NYC.

White privilege is on display right there.

Now your disingenuous attempt to deflect by claiming that blacks live in higher crime areas is yet another example of white privilege. Too bad you are blind to the obvious in that regard. Whites are privileged to live in lower crime areas. If there was no white privilege then the statistics would be the same across all race groups.

Blacks commit over 50% of the murders in NYC. Whites commit less than 10% of the murders in NYC. Once again, see here >>>> http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf

So whites are over represented in Your stop and frisk model and blacks are underrepresented. But hey, no ones perfect. They got it close enough. As I said before, you scrutinize the areas with the most crime. Blacks commit the overwhelming majority of violent crime in NYC. So when the crime analyst looks at a map of high risk areas he is more likely to see the black areas to be more high risk. But his high risk map doesn't show race, only risk. That's race neutral. Your not going to tie up your limited law enforcement resources to combat crime in low crime areas equally as high crime areas. Thus, your search everyone the same theory has been laid to rest.

LL is right. You are not taking your own OP seriously. Then again I was right not to expect any honesty and integrity from you either.

Have a nice day.

/unsubscribe

Is that your response to my argument? If my argument wasn't honest then point out where I was dishonest. Its that simple.

 

[LoneLaugher]

It still applies today. Driving While Black is alive and well in NYC under the Bloomberg administration. DeBlasio is looking to rescind it.

Driving While Black by Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody The Washington Monthly

January/ February 2014Driving While Black
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows how police target African Americans on highways across America.

By Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody

If there’s one issue that won Bill de Blasio the New York Democratic mayoral primary in September, on his way to a crushing 74 percent to 24 percent victory in the November general election, it was his full-throated opposition to “stop and frisk.” Under this policy, police officers stop, question, and frisk people they deem suspicious, usually with zero evidence that they’ve committed a crime. De Blasio’s predecessor Michael Bloomberg and his GOP election opponent Joe Lhota strongly defended stop and frisk, arguing that it helps reduce the crime rate. But the voters of New York had clearly had enough of a policy that, in practice, overwhelmingly targets minorities, especially young blacks, only a tiny fraction of whom are ever found to be carrying drugs, or a gun, or indeed to have done anything wrong at all.

What few Americans (or at least white Americans) know is that stop and frisk is not limited to New York City. Versions of the policy are in place across the country. And just as in New York, whatever crime-fighting benefits derive from the policy come at the expense of contravening basic American principles of equal treatment under the law and of angering law-abiding minority citizens whose support and cooperation the police need to fight crime.​

If ever there was an example of current day "white privilege" this has to be it.

If you want to stop violent crime you scrutinize where the violent crime is. If that happens to be among the black community then the qualification of such a stop and frisk program, if done simply by looking at high risk areas, is race neutral. It may have a disparate impact on the black community, but blacks commit a disparate amount of the crime in New York City

(See HERE http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf )

So the policy is race neutral. The only privilege whites have here is to be living in an area where black crime is not as effective. But that is hardly an argument for "white privilege." If the privilege you speak of is that whites do not act as deviant as blacks then you should call it "Black self destruction," not "white privilege." White privilege assumes an unearned status. Are you saying that whites have an unearned status due to black deviance? That may be true, but whites did not create that status for whites. Blacks created it for them via "black self destruction."

You stopped being serious. Enjoy your day.

That post was totally serious. Where was it not?

You are ignoring the history of the matter......wrapped in white privilege....that led to the environment that you are citing as the major reason for the disparity in arrests. It is odd...especially since I've already addressed it.

Indeed, I thought that was what your argument was.

So, if that is the case we must be getting worse off, not better with respect to privilege. Black single parenthood is hovering around 73%, a feat never reached even during the days of Jim Crow. The majority of AIDS cases in the US are African American. Are we to attribute this to white privilege? Are we to attribute this to lack of black education? Blacks are more educated today than they have ever been before. They have more freedom today than every before in the US. So what's with all the illegitimate births? 3 of 4 black children are born to a single parent. White privilege did not do that.

On that same note, whites have gone up to around 25% illegitimacy. But they cant blame it on someone's privilege. They can blame it on the hyper sexualized culture they bought into but not someone's privilege. The same is true for blacks.

What happened between Jim Crow and today where blacks find their women giving birth to children they cannot afford to raise or educate? Should we go back to Jim Crow? That CANNOT be the answer. The fault lies with black culture itself where illegitimacy has become the rule rather than the exception. So you can point to historic discrimination all you want, however, it is a lame excuse for the actions that hinder blacks today.

I thought it was too good to be true.

 

[Where_r_my_Keys]

If you want to stop violent crime you scrutinize where the violent crime is. If that happens to be among the black community then the qualification of such a stop and frisk program, if done simply by looking at high risk areas, is race neutral. It may have a disparate impact on the black community, but blacks commit a disparate amount of the crime in New York City

(See HERE http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf )

So the policy is race neutral. The only privilege whites have here is to be living in an area where black crime is not as effective. But that is hardly an argument for "white privilege." If the privilege you speak of is that whites do not act as deviant as blacks then you should call it "Black self destruction," not "white privilege." White privilege assumes an unearned status. Are you saying that whites have an unearned status due to black deviance? That may be true, but whites did not create that status for whites. Blacks created it for them via "black self destruction."

You stopped being serious. Enjoy your day.

That post was totally serious. Where was it not?

You are ignoring the history of the matter......wrapped in white privilege....that led to the environment that you are citing as the major reason for the disparity in arrests. It is odd...especially since I've already addressed it.

Indeed, I thought that was what your argument was.

So, if that is the case we must be getting worse off, not better with respect to privilege. Black single parenthood is hovering around 73%, a feat never reached even during the days of Jim Crow. The majority of AIDS cases in the US are African American. Are we to attribute this to white privilege? Are we to attribute this to lack of black education? Blacks are more educated today than they have ever been before. They have more freedom today than every before in the US. So what's with all the illegitimate births? 3 of 4 black children are born to a single parent. White privilege did not do that.

On that same note, whites have gone up to around 25% illegitimacy. But they cant blame it on someone's privilege. They can blame it on the hyper sexualized culture they bought into but not someone's privilege. The same is true for blacks.

What happened between Jim Crow and today where blacks find their women giving birth to children they cannot afford to raise or educate? Should we go back to Jim Crow? That CANNOT be the answer. The fault lies with black culture itself where illegitimacy has become the rule rather than the exception. So you can point to historic discrimination all you want, however, it is a lame excuse for the actions that hinder blacks today.

I thought it was too good to be true.

You've demonstrated that you've no means to sustain "White Privilege", now you need to blame 'the contest' of the myth, as being the reason the myth isn't accepted.

Such is the nature of evil.

 

[Publius1787]

It still applies today. Driving While Black is alive and well in NYC under the Bloomberg administration. DeBlasio is looking to rescind it.

Driving While Black by Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody The Washington Monthly

January/ February 2014Driving While Black
“Stop and frisk” isn’t just a reality in New York City. New data shows how police target African Americans on highways across America.

By Charles Epp and Steven Maynard-Moody

If there’s one issue that won Bill de Blasio the New York Democratic mayoral primary in September, on his way to a crushing 74 percent to 24 percent victory in the November general election, it was his full-throated opposition to “stop and frisk.” Under this policy, police officers stop, question, and frisk people they deem suspicious, usually with zero evidence that they’ve committed a crime. De Blasio’s predecessor Michael Bloomberg and his GOP election opponent Joe Lhota strongly defended stop and frisk, arguing that it helps reduce the crime rate. But the voters of New York had clearly had enough of a policy that, in practice, overwhelmingly targets minorities, especially young blacks, only a tiny fraction of whom are ever found to be carrying drugs, or a gun, or indeed to have done anything wrong at all.

What few Americans (or at least white Americans) know is that stop and frisk is not limited to New York City. Versions of the policy are in place across the country. And just as in New York, whatever crime-fighting benefits derive from the policy come at the expense of contravening basic American principles of equal treatment under the law and of angering law-abiding minority citizens whose support and cooperation the police need to fight crime.​

If ever there was an example of current day "white privilege" this has to be it.

If you want to stop violent crime you scrutinize where the violent crime is. If that happens to be among the black community then the qualification of such a stop and frisk program, if done simply by looking at high risk areas, is race neutral. It may have a disparate impact on the black community, but blacks commit a disparate amount of the crime in New York City

(See HERE http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf )

So the policy is race neutral. The only privilege whites have here is to be living in an area where black crime is not as effective. But that is hardly an argument for "white privilege." If the privilege you speak of is that whites do not act as deviant as blacks then you should call it "Black self destruction," not "white privilege." White privilege assumes an unearned status. Are you saying that whites have an unearned status due to black deviance? That may be true, but whites did not create that status for whites. Blacks created it for them via "black self destruction." So its not a privilege at all. Its simply a result of behaving themselves better than others. That, my friend, is earned.

Your own link exposes that you are wrong,

The 2010 Census listed NYC racial demographics as White 44.6%, Blacks 25.1% and Hispanics 27.5%.

Demographics of New York City - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Your link for Stop and Frisk;

View attachment 34495

Only 11% of whites stopped and frisked even though they make up 44% of the population of NYC.

White privilege is on display right there.

Now your disingenuous attempt to deflect by claiming that blacks live in higher crime areas is yet another example of white privilege. Too bad you are blind to the obvious in that regard. Whites are privileged to live in lower crime areas. If there was no white privilege then the statistics would be the same across all race groups.

Blacks commit over 50% of the murders in NYC. Whites commit less than 10% of the murders in NYC. Once again, see here >>>> http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf

So whites are over represented in Your stop and frisk model and blacks are underrepresented. But hey, no ones perfect. They got it close enough. As I said before, you scrutinize the areas with the most crime. Blacks commit the overwhelming majority of violent crime in NYC. So when the crime analyst looks at a map of high risk areas he is more likely to see the black areas to be more high risk. But his high risk map doesn't show race, only risk. That's race neutral. Your not going to tie up your limited law enforcement resources to combat crime in low crime areas equally as high crime areas. Thus, your search everyone the same theory has been laid to rest.

LL is right. You are not taking your own OP seriously. Then again I was right not to expect any honesty and integrity from you either.

Have a nice day.

/unsubscribe

Well that is a wonderful means of conceding that as far as you're concerned, 'White Privilege' is a myth fraudulently perpetrated by a deceitful cult, as a means to influence the ignorant!

And THAT concession is duly noted and summarily accepted.

I agree. Dishonest arguments are easy to decipher. he simply called me dishonest without proof of dishonesty and left. He is indeed running scared from his own argument and instead of conceding the facts he opted to remain ignorant.

 

[Publius1787]

If you want to stop violent crime you scrutinize where the violent crime is. If that happens to be among the black community then the qualification of such a stop and frisk program, if done simply by looking at high risk areas, is race neutral. It may have a disparate impact on the black community, but blacks commit a disparate amount of the crime in New York City

(See HERE http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downlo...planning/2013_year_end_enforcement_report.pdf )

So the policy is race neutral. The only privilege whites have here is to be living in an area where black crime is not as effective. But that is hardly an argument for "white privilege." If the privilege you speak of is that whites do not act as deviant as blacks then you should call it "Black self destruction," not "white privilege." White privilege assumes an unearned status. Are you saying that whites have an unearned status due to black deviance? That may be true, but whites did not create that status for whites. Blacks created it for them via "black self destruction."

You stopped being serious. Enjoy your day.

That post was totally serious. Where was it not?

You are ignoring the history of the matter......wrapped in white privilege....that led to the environment that you are citing as the major reason for the disparity in arrests. It is odd...especially since I've already addressed it.

Indeed, I thought that was what your argument was.

So, if that is the case we must be getting worse off, not better with respect to privilege. Black single parenthood is hovering around 73%, a feat never reached even during the days of Jim Crow. The majority of AIDS cases in the US are African American. Are we to attribute this to white privilege? Are we to attribute this to lack of black education? Blacks are more educated today than they have ever been before. They have more freedom today than every before in the US. So what's with all the illegitimate births? 3 of 4 black children are born to a single parent. White privilege did not do that.

On that same note, whites have gone up to around 25% illegitimacy. But they cant blame it on someone's privilege. They can blame it on the hyper sexualized culture they bought into but not someone's privilege. The same is true for blacks.

What happened between Jim Crow and today where blacks find their women giving birth to children they cannot afford to raise or educate? Should we go back to Jim Crow? That CANNOT be the answer. The fault lies with black culture itself where illegitimacy has become the rule rather than the exception. So you can point to historic discrimination all you want, however, it is a lame excuse for the actions that hinder blacks today.

I thought it was too good to be true.

Comeon man, don't do this. I really wanted to discuss this topic with you. I am in desperate need of a serious debate in this forum. Please don't do what everyone else does.

 

[Publius1787]

You stopped being serious. Enjoy your day.

That post was totally serious. Where was it not?

You are ignoring the history of the matter......wrapped in white privilege....that led to the environment that you are citing as the major reason for the disparity in arrests. It is odd...especially since I've already addressed it.

Indeed, I thought that was what your argument was.

So, if that is the case we must be getting worse off, not better with respect to privilege. Black single parenthood is hovering around 73%, a feat never reached even during the days of Jim Crow. The majority of AIDS cases in the US are African American. Are we to attribute this to white privilege? Are we to attribute this to lack of black education? Blacks are more educated today than they have ever been before. They have more freedom today than every before in the US. So what's with all the illegitimate births? 3 of 4 black children are born to a single parent. White privilege did not do that.

On that same note, whites have gone up to around 25% illegitimacy. But they cant blame it on someone's privilege. They can blame it on the hyper sexualized culture they bought into but not someone's privilege. The same is true for blacks.

What happened between Jim Crow and today where blacks find their women giving birth to children they cannot afford to raise or educate? Should we go back to Jim Crow? That CANNOT be the answer. The fault lies with black culture itself where illegitimacy has become the rule rather than the exception. So you can point to historic discrimination all you want, however, it is a lame excuse for the actions that hinder blacks today.

I thought it was too good to be true.

You've demonstrated that you've no means to sustain "White Privilege", now you need to blame 'the contest' of the myth, as being the reason the myth isn't accepted.

Such is the nature of evil.

Let it be forever known that I made the honest effort. I presented arguments that they refuse to respond to. The discussion was not ended by me. Did you read what I posted? Not a single effort to recant my argument. Why? I got nothing but a few fellas searching for excuses to disengage.

 

[LoneLaugher]

You stopped being serious. Enjoy your day.

That post was totally serious. Where was it not?

You are ignoring the history of the matter......wrapped in white privilege....that led to the environment that you are citing as the major reason for the disparity in arrests. It is odd...especially since I've already addressed it.

Indeed, I thought that was what your argument was.

So, if that is the case we must be getting worse off, not better with respect to privilege. Black single parenthood is hovering around 73%, a feat never reached even during the days of Jim Crow. The majority of AIDS cases in the US are African American. Are we to attribute this to white privilege? Are we to attribute this to lack of black education? Blacks are more educated today than they have ever been before. They have more freedom today than every before in the US. So what's with all the illegitimate births? 3 of 4 black children are born to a single parent. White privilege did not do that.

On that same note, whites have gone up to around 25% illegitimacy. But they cant blame it on someone's privilege. They can blame it on the hyper sexualized culture they bought into but not someone's privilege. The same is true for blacks.

What happened between Jim Crow and today where blacks find their women giving birth to children they cannot afford to raise or educate? Should we go back to Jim Crow? That CANNOT be the answer. The fault lies with black culture itself where illegitimacy has become the rule rather than the exception. So you can point to historic discrimination all you want, however, it is a lame excuse for the actions that hinder blacks today.

I thought it was too good to be true.

Comeon man, don't do this. I really wanted to discuss this topic with you. I am in desperate need of a serious debate in this forum. Please don't do what everyone else does.

I will continue the discussion if you concede that white privilege exists. I'm not asking you to say that it is responsible every negative thing in society....or that you somehow use privilege to do anything. I just want you to concede that it is a real thing and that it is worth addressing.

If you do....I'll wade into the discussion of illegitimacy.....if that's what you want to discuss.

 

[LoneLaugher]

That post was totally serious. Where was it not?

You are ignoring the history of the matter......wrapped in white privilege....that led to the environment that you are citing as the major reason for the disparity in arrests. It is odd...especially since I've already addressed it.

Indeed, I thought that was what your argument was.

So, if that is the case we must be getting worse off, not better with respect to privilege. Black single parenthood is hovering around 73%, a feat never reached even during the days of Jim Crow. The majority of AIDS cases in the US are African American. Are we to attribute this to white privilege? Are we to attribute this to lack of black education? Blacks are more educated today than they have ever been before. They have more freedom today than every before in the US. So what's with all the illegitimate births? 3 of 4 black children are born to a single parent. White privilege did not do that.

On that same note, whites have gone up to around 25% illegitimacy. But they cant blame it on someone's privilege. They can blame it on the hyper sexualized culture they bought into but not someone's privilege. The same is true for blacks.

What happened between Jim Crow and today where blacks find their women giving birth to children they cannot afford to raise or educate? Should we go back to Jim Crow? That CANNOT be the answer. The fault lies with black culture itself where illegitimacy has become the rule rather than the exception. So you can point to historic discrimination all you want, however, it is a lame excuse for the actions that hinder blacks today.

I thought it was too good to be true.

You've demonstrated that you've no means to sustain "White Privilege", now you need to blame 'the contest' of the myth, as being the reason the myth isn't accepted.

Such is the nature of evil.

Let it be forever known that I made the honest effort. I presented arguments that they refuse to respond to. The discussion was not ended by me. Did you read what I posted? Not a single effort to recant my argument. Why? I got nothing but a few fellas searching for excuses to disengage.

That's sounds important.

 

[Publius1787]

That post was totally serious. Where was it not?

You are ignoring the history of the matter......wrapped in white privilege....that led to the environment that you are citing as the major reason for the disparity in arrests. It is odd...especially since I've already addressed it.

Indeed, I thought that was what your argument was.

So, if that is the case we must be getting worse off, not better with respect to privilege. Black single parenthood is hovering around 73%, a feat never reached even during the days of Jim Crow. The majority of AIDS cases in the US are African American. Are we to attribute this to white privilege? Are we to attribute this to lack of black education? Blacks are more educated today than they have ever been before. They have more freedom today than every before in the US. So what's with all the illegitimate births? 3 of 4 black children are born to a single parent. White privilege did not do that.

On that same note, whites have gone up to around 25% illegitimacy. But they cant blame it on someone's privilege. They can blame it on the hyper sexualized culture they bought into but not someone's privilege. The same is true for blacks.

What happened between Jim Crow and today where blacks find their women giving birth to children they cannot afford to raise or educate? Should we go back to Jim Crow? That CANNOT be the answer. The fault lies with black culture itself where illegitimacy has become the rule rather than the exception. So you can point to historic discrimination all you want, however, it is a lame excuse for the actions that hinder blacks today.

I thought it was too good to be true.

Comeon man, don't do this. I really wanted to discuss this topic with you. I am in desperate need of a serious debate in this forum. Please don't do what everyone else does.

I will continue the discussion if you concede that white privilege exists. I'm not asking you to say that it is responsible every negative thing in society....or that you somehow use privilege to do anything. I just want you to concede that it is a real thing and that it is worth addressing.

If you do....I'll wade into the discussion of illegitimacy.....if that's what you want to discuss.

No, I'm sorry. I cannot. Privilege is unearned. My point about illegitimacy was to demonstrate a factor that has gotten worse despite gains in civil rights over time historically. Ergo, historical arguments only go so far. I can take a poor Asian kid from the slums and put him the most crappy school in the US, and so as long as his parents are there to guide him (Even with their limited English), he will be a first generation success story. My question is, why can blacks do the same?

Listen, I do want to continue this debate, but I cannot concede a point that is grounded in unproven theory. I feel I have been honest with you and demonstrated a drive to learn. If you corner me I will admit it. I have no pride that the Marines didn't strip from me and I am not afraid to be wrong. But I cannot concede that "white privilege" exists when it is an unproven theory unsupported by anything posted thus far. To do so would be true intellectual dishonesty on my part.

So what's in the argument for you and I? Well, if either of us aren't convinced to change our minds we will certainly be better equipped to handle those who support or deny the existence of "white privilege." Isn't learning enough? Is that not what we are here to do?

 

[Publius1787]

You are ignoring the history of the matter......wrapped in white privilege....that led to the environment that you are citing as the major reason for the disparity in arrests. It is odd...especially since I've already addressed it.

Indeed, I thought that was what your argument was.

So, if that is the case we must be getting worse off, not better with respect to privilege. Black single parenthood is hovering around 73%, a feat never reached even during the days of Jim Crow. The majority of AIDS cases in the US are African American. Are we to attribute this to white privilege? Are we to attribute this to lack of black education? Blacks are more educated today than they have ever been before. They have more freedom today than every before in the US. So what's with all the illegitimate births? 3 of 4 black children are born to a single parent. White privilege did not do that.

On that same note, whites have gone up to around 25% illegitimacy. But they cant blame it on someone's privilege. They can blame it on the hyper sexualized culture they bought into but not someone's privilege. The same is true for blacks.

What happened between Jim Crow and today where blacks find their women giving birth to children they cannot afford to raise or educate? Should we go back to Jim Crow? That CANNOT be the answer. The fault lies with black culture itself where illegitimacy has become the rule rather than the exception. So you can point to historic discrimination all you want, however, it is a lame excuse for the actions that hinder blacks today.

I thought it was too good to be true.

You've demonstrated that you've no means to sustain "White Privilege", now you need to blame 'the contest' of the myth, as being the reason the myth isn't accepted.

Such is the nature of evil.

Let it be forever known that I made the honest effort. I presented arguments that they refuse to respond to. The discussion was not ended by me. Did you read what I posted? Not a single effort to recant my argument. Why? I got nothing but a few fellas searching for excuses to disengage.

That's sounds important.

That's how I see it. Honestly.