White Privilege - Fact or Fiction

Author: TWS1405
Racism
black privilege
white privilege
reverse racism

Posts

Total: 275
#61
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
what are your proposed solutions ?
Dunno - agreeing that there is a problem is a good first step; and perhaps not make the problem worse.so it makes me wonder
so it makes me wonder
if people "self-segregate"
how do you stop them ?

the italians want to live in an italian neighborhood
the russians want to live in a russian neighborhood
the vietnamese want to live in a vietnamese neighborhood
the haitians want to live in a haitian neighborhood
the jamaicans want to live in a jamaican neighborhood
and they tell us that black students do better in school with black teachers
doesn't this translate logically to everyone else as well ?
sense of community
is like a sixth sense
food and language and art and music
cult(ure)
Topic's author
#62
TWS1405
TWS1405's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,048
3
4
7
TWS1405's avatar
TWS1405
3
4
7
-->
@Ramshutu
->@TWS1405
Everyone born in America has equal rights, equal access to anything and everything they want to achieve. There is no right or guarantee to equal outcomes. One only gets out of life what they put into it. Just because you are not as good as another =/= supremacy of any kind. 
So what you’re saying is (2) that the difference in outcomes between whites and blacks is because blacks “are not as good as” whites.
No, that's not what I am saying...AT ALL! Strawman - Definition & Examples | LF (logicalfallacies.org)



Racist: a person who believes in racism, the doctrine that one's own racial group is superior or that a particular racial group is inferior to the others.
If your belief is true - you meet the dictionary definition of a racist.

White Supremacy: the belief, theory, or doctrine that white people are inherently superior to people from all other racial and ethnic groups, especially Black people, and are therefore rightfully the dominant group in any society
… and pretty much the dictionary definition of a white supremacy.

#63
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@TWS1405
No, that's not what I am saying...AT ALL! Strawman - Definition & Examples | LF (logicalfallacies.org)
He asserts without justification.

I said:
2.) Whites and blacks are subject to identical social conditions and constraints - but black people do worse because they’re not as good as whites. 
Is white supremacy - you replied.
“Everyone born in America has equal rights, equal access to anything and everything they want to achieve. There is no right or guarantee to equal outcomes. One only gets out of life what they put into it. Just because you are not as good as another =/= supremacy of any kind.”
The only reasonable or possible way of taking this statement was that you disagree there are any barriers for blacks - and the suggestion you make is that they’re lack of success is due to not being as good as another. You even say the words.

Doesn’t really matter though: because if you think lesser success metrics in black populations is because of something about them; that means that you are stating there is something about black people that is isn’t as good as in white people.

That’s the logical implication of your argument - whether you like it or not. 

You not liking it does not make it a straw man. And given it is absolutely the implication of what  you just said: it’s not straw man.

Yet another Strawman - Definition & Examples | LF (logicalfallacies.org) and Ad Hominem - Definition & Examples | LF (logicalfallacies.org)

Yet another Strawman - Definition & Examples | LF (logicalfallacies.org) and Ad Hominem - Definition & Examples | LF (logicalfallacies.org)
Firstly, I’m not misrepresenting you - so not a straw man.

Secondly, my argument is that a given position is a white supremacist position.  You disagreed that it was a white supremacy position.

Demonstrating that the position in question is the definition of white supremacy is not an Ad Hominem - it’s proving the point I was making, and proving your argument wrong. That you also find it insulting to you, doesn’t make it an ad hominem.


You keep tripping up in your fallacies all the time. Perhaps you should read some of these links, it may be helpful for you.


Topic's author
#64
TWS1405
TWS1405's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 1,048
3
4
7
TWS1405's avatar
TWS1405
3
4
7
-->
@Ramshutu

No, that's not what I am saying...AT ALL! Strawman - Definition & Examples | LF (logicalfallacies.org)
He asserts without justification.
Really?

->@TWS1405
Everyone born in America has equal rights, equal access to anything and everything they want to achieve. There is no right or guarantee to equal outcomes. One only gets out of life what they put into it. Just because you are not as good as another =/= supremacy of any kind. 
So what you’re saying is (2) that the difference in outcomes between whites and blacks is because blacks “are not as good as” whites.
"So what you're saying...." = classic strawman fallacy. 

Yet another Strawman - Definition & Examples | LF (logicalfallacies.org) and Ad Hominem - Definition & Examples | LF (logicalfallacies.org)
Firstly, I’m not misrepresenting you - so not a straw man.
Yes, you are. And it is in black and white for all to see. 

Your word salad, jumbled arguments, and circular reasoning is quite apparent. 

You got caught. Own it. Stop being a liar. Stop being an intellectual coward. Have a little integrity. If that is even possible. 
#65
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@TWS1405
Really?
Yes - you literally said “straw man”; didn’t explain why, nor justified why or how my argument misrepresented your position - indeed, you didn’t even clarify what your position actually was. That makes it an assertion.

So what you're saying...." = classic strawman fallacy.
Only if I misrepresent what you’re saying, which I didn’t - you have yet to say how I actually did that

Yes, you are. And it is in black and white for all to see.
How exactly? Why did what I said misrepresent your position; I explained why it’s the only way of interpreting what you said.

Your word salad, jumbled arguments, and circular reasoning is quite apparent.
Now this is an  Ad Hominem!

You got caught. Own it. Stop being a liar. Stop being an intellectual coward. Have a little integrity. If that is even possible.
And another Ad Hom!

Stop being an intellectual coward? You assert I’m making a straw man twice, refuse to explain why, or clarify what your position actually - then call me a bunch of names. Hardly the pinnacle intellectual bravery. 

I - on the other hand - explained, logically, why that particular position is white supremacy - you have no answer to that : and I explained how and why my characterization of your position is entirely accurate - you have no answer.  I’ve responded to every point.

It’s hardly intellectual cowardice to not agree with some nonsense you just made up from nothing.

I presume, however, that you’re going to round off this exchange by calling me names and refusing to actually respond to any of the arguments, throwing out a number of excuses as to why you wont respond; and then capitulate like you have in every other thread. 


#66
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@TWS1405
ok,

(1) do you believe that "black culture" promotes criminal behavior ?

(2) do you believe that "white culture" is superior to "black culture" ?
#67
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
I presume, however, that you’re going to round off this exchange by calling me names and refusing to actually respond to any of the arguments, throwing out a number of excuses as to why you wont respond; and then capitulate like you have in every other thread.
this is a purely voluntary interaction
#68
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
So what you're saying...." = classic strawman fallacy.
Only if I misrepresent what you’re saying, which I didn’t - you have yet to say how I actually did that
THE SPEAKER THEMSELVES

is the ONLY

person who can confirm

if your paraphrasing

or summary

of THEIR OWN ARGUMENT

matches their OWN INTENT and or BELIEF
#69
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@3RU7AL
THE SPEAKER THEMSELVES

is the ONLY

person who can confirm

if your paraphrasing

or summary

of THEIR OWN ARGUMENT

matches their OWN INTENT and or BELIEF
I showed that the logical implications of the explicit argument he made, is explicitly white supremacy. This would be true regardless of what he intended.

I also explained how the only reasonable interpretation of what he said is exactly as I paraphrased.

Thus far he’s refused to clarify what he actually meant - so the only thing I have to work with is what he said.

Denying he meant something whilst refusing to  clarify what he actually meant, whilst what he said appears to clearly indicate what I said it did; and definitely logically implies what I said regardless of intent or belief - means that whilst technically true, is largely irrelevant.


this is a purely voluntary interaction
And this is relevant how?

If you read my post - I am pointing out the hypocrisy of someone who refuses to engage on a point multiple times, resorts to name calling, and has a propensity for making excuses and capitulating on responses - also calling someone an intellectual coward.

That he is not forced  to respond to me explaining why he is a colossal unmitigated hypocrite in this specific respect, is largely irrelevant.
#70
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
This would be true regardless of what he intended.
ok, this makes a lot of sense if you don't care what the person you're interacting with intended
#71
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
I also explained how the only reasonable interpretation of what he said is exactly as I paraphrased.
there is rarely, and i mean rarely, "only one reasonable interpretation"

why not simply ask "is this what you meant to say ?"
#72
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
Thus far he’s refused to clarify what he actually meant - so the only thing I have to work with is what he said.
probably because they feel forced into a defensive posture
#73
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
this is a purely voluntary interaction
And this is relevant how?

If you read my post - I am pointing out the hypocrisy of someone who refuses to engage on a point multiple times, resorts to name calling, and has a propensity for making excuses and capitulating on responses - also calling someone an intellectual coward.

That he is not forced  to respond to me explaining why he is a colossal unmitigated hypocrite in this specific respect, is largely irrelevant.
instead of complaining

you might consider simply abandoning the conversation

you don't owe anyone an explanation

and detailing your frustration and your personal perception of "hypocrisy" is a textbook ad hominem attack

and will likely lead to "the backfire effect" [**]
#74
Lair77
Lair77's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 97
0
1
4
Lair77's avatar
Lair77
0
1
4
Fact.  Because, in many instances, decades ago, African Americans were denied opportunities to get a mortgage for a house.  Even if they had the money and income to do so....

The fact that they can buy houses now is irrelevant now.  Because they missed out on the best time in all of human history to buy a house.  Anyone who bought a house in the 70's or 80's, they'd easily see the house go up 10x value by now.

So, yes, they can buy a house now that prices are over-inflated but missed one of the biggest opportunities in American history to accrue wealth.

There are many black people who are renting now that would actually be owning property and passing property onto their children if racism didn't exist.


#75
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Lair77
A great many of the houses that existed in the 70's are no longer existing. The average life of an apartment building is 55 years and the average life of a house is 40 years.
#76
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Lair77
Fact.  Because, in many instances, decades ago, African Americans were denied opportunities to get a mortgage for a house.  Even if they had the money and income to do so....

The fact that they can buy houses now is irrelevant now.  Because they missed out on the best time in all of human history to buy a house.  Anyone who bought a house in the 70's or 80's, they'd easily see the house go up 10x value by now.

So, yes, they can buy a house now that prices are over-inflated but missed one of the biggest opportunities in American history to accrue wealth.

There are many black people who are renting now that would actually be owning property and passing property onto their children if racism didn't exist.
The only way to address the injustices of the past and 300 years of black slavery is reparation.
Blacks built America but never got paid for their labour. Time to man up America.

#77
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Shila
You do realize there are more Black immigrants from Africa and other places with POC since 1865 than People with any kind of slave heritage exist today in America...

There are also way more non POC that immigrated to America after 1865 than ever existed before 1865 in America. A lot more.

What you are asking to do is demand a great many non-POC immigrants from 8 generations ago who never had the opportunity to have anything to do with slavery to pay "reparations" to POC immigrants from 8 generations ago that were never a slave and never had the opportunity to be a slave after 1865.
#78
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
A great many of the houses that existed in the 70's are no longer existing.
I GUESS ONCE A HOUSE EXPIRES, THE PROPERTY VALUE GOES TO ZERO
#79
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Just saying, somebody has to build and pay for new housing. Nothing lasts forever, even slavery.
#80
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@3RU7AL
ok, this makes a lot of sense if you don't care what the person you're interacting with intended
How does me caring - or not - change the validity of what I said?

there is rarely, and i mean rarely, "only one reasonable interpretation"
By all means correct me if you think my interpretation is incorrect or unreasonable. Otherwise this is more of an empty platitude than anything that I need to respond to.

why not simply ask "is this what you meant to say ?"
By all means explain how the validity or context of my argument changes depending on appending that phrase somewhere. Otherwise this is another platitude, as opposed to something relevant to the points I’m raising.


probably because they feel forced into a defensive posture
If someone is unwilling to clarify their position, because someone questions it - a debate site is probably not the best place for them.
#81
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Just saying, somebody has to build and pay for new housing.
PROPERTY GENERALLY (BUT NOT ALWAYS) INCREASES IN VALUE OVER TIME
#82
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
ok, this makes a lot of sense if you don't care what the person you're interacting with intended
How does me caring - or not - change the validity of what I said?
are you generally more interested with

mincing words

or, are you generally more interested in

exchanging ideas
#83
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@3RU7AL
Depreciation of a house is inevitable over time. Property values of the land do not inevitably rise. Especially property in a city where crime is on the rise.

None of these realities have anything to do with skin color or slavery.
#84
Shila
Shila's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 3,006
3
3
5
Shila's avatar
Shila
3
3
5
-->
@Greyparrot
--> @Shila
You do realize there are more Black immigrants from Africa and other places with POC since 1865 than People with any kind of slave heritage exist today in America...

There are also way more non POC that immigrated to America after 1865 than ever existed before 1865 in America. A lot more.

What you are asking to do is demand a great many non-POC immigrants from 8 generations ago who never had the opportunity to have anything to do with slavery to pay "reparations" to POC immigrants from 8 generations ago that were never a slave and never had the opportunity to be a slave after 1865
No problem.

Federal Records that Help Identify Former Enslaved People and Slave Holders
Claire Kluskens
National Archives and Records Administration, Washington, DC
Researching African American ancestors who lived before the American Civil War (1861–1865) poses unique challenges. Enslaved individuals rarely had surnames and created few records themselves. Successful research usually requires positively identifying the slave holder(s) who may have created records that mentioned slaves. In addition, Southern states lost records due to the Civil War and other courthouse fires, and often didn’t begin recording births, marriages, or deaths until after 1900. Even African Americans whose ancestors were free before 1865 may find research challenging if their ancestors moved frequently, worked for others, and owned no land.
Successful family history research—regardless of one’s ancestors’ race or ethnic background—requires "reasonably exhaustive research" in all relevant records. It requires researching not only direct ancestors but also their “FAN” club—family, associates, and neighbors—because records created by or about those individuals may provide critical information about one’s own direct ancestors. Quality research requires investigating all types of records: federal, state, county, local, church, newspapers, and so forth.
The National Archives and Records Administration, as the custodian of the permanently valuable records of the U.S. Federal Government, holds a wide variety of records that may help African Americans identify slave holders and ancestors who were enslaved before 1865. This presentation highlights some of those records.
#85
Greyparrot
Greyparrot's avatar
Debates: 4
Posts: 25,969
3
4
10
Greyparrot's avatar
Greyparrot
3
4
10
-->
@Shila
You can claim that it is "no problem"

But the misappropriation of the recent Covid reparations proves that it's absolutely a problem with the current government. In a period of inflation and recession, asking people to do anything other than get back to work  while the government agrees to stop printing money devaluing the standard of living for everyone is asking for the immediate destruction of the nation. Maybe after we get our finances in order, we can play around with reparations like we did with the Covid reparations that helped put us in the current economic condition. At least we can survive the economic destruction better with such a mismanaged reparations scheme.
#86
Polytheist-Witch
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 4,188
3
3
6
Polytheist-Witch's avatar
Polytheist-Witch
3
3
6
Considering your view on people of color, when you're in a area of people like you you certainly have privilege over someone who is a person of color. I don't understand how white people don't get that we have been able to move through society generally easier than people who are not white. This isn't rocket science. I think when you say the word White privilege people like you automatically assume that you somehow taken advantage of other people that's not the case it's just that you've benefited from being white. Of course you seem to hate everybody but white men so I don't know maybe you're just offended in general at everything.
#87
Ramshutu
Ramshutu's avatar
Debates: 43
Posts: 2,768
6
9
10
Ramshutu's avatar
Ramshutu
6
9
10
-->
@3RU7AL
instead of complaining

you might consider simply abandoning the conversation

Why? On what possible grounds do you have to judge or estimate the value, worth or benefit I place on pressing someone on a point they ignore?

Especially given that you are not following your own advice.

you don't owe anyone an explanation

and detailing your frustration and your personal perception of "hypocrisy" is a textbook ad hominem attack
It would be an Ad Hom if my charge of hypocrisy was instead of place of attacking his point. I clearly attack the point (that I am an intellectual coward), and point out that his accusations are reflective of his own behaviours than mine. That’s clearly both relevant, and salient to what he was stating. 

Attacking me for my using an Ad Hominem, rather than making any attempt to attack my point - that is, ironically, very much an ad hominem

and will likely lead to "the backfire effect"
“Stop being a liar. Stop being an intellectual coward. Have a little integrity”

Wally me through your logic here: Person A offers a litany of insults against Person B, to which Person B responds by explaining (a) the accusations are invalid, (b) they actually express the Person A own behaviour.

Please explain why Person B should be cognizant of the possibility of the push-back effect in someone who has already bandied a number of insults - and is already not engaging in a debate?

Likewise, could you explain why you feel that responding to an insult with an argument is deserving of criticism - but the person levying the original insult is not called out for the same reasons?

I am all for high minded moral arbiters obsessing about the right or best way to argue and injecting themselves into other conversations: but when this criticism is levied so unevenly, one cannot help but suspect that the reasons for objection is more about the who than the what.
#88
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Greyparrot
Depreciation of a house is inevitable over time. Property values of the land do not inevitably rise. Especially property in a city where crime is on the rise.
sure

but statistically

if my grandfather owned a home and or property

that increases the social and financial advantages of my family

and that increases my chances of having a better education, a better job, and owning a home and or property of my own
#89
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
Especially given that you are not following your own advice.
i actually enjoy these exchanges

and i don't complain about them
#90
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 14,582
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Ramshutu
Why? On what possible grounds do you have to judge or estimate the value, worth or benefit I place on pressing someone on a point they ignore?
do as you wish, of course

but it appears to be an attempt to coerce, or shame your conversation partner into responding

when you could simply ask them

and perhaps restate or reframe what you believe are your "key points"