Does white privilege really exist?

I get that a lot from liberals, even on local Facebook groups where everyone can see everyone’s face and their name.
They say something like “all Eastern Europeans are racist”, or “you are a Russian troll” (even though Russia has trolls, not Ukrainians).
Then you call out racism - attack on ethnicity.
They say you are not black.
Then you ask - are Nazis racists? They killed mostly among ethnic lines, not racial lines.
The answer is “you are not black”.

I generally try to be civil in such conversations hoping that other minorities will read and make their own conclusions.
Democratic Party was racist 100 years ago and is racist now. They just hate another race now. And they’ll jump into insults and attack your credibility based on your ethnicity as long as they feel like they can get away with it. Many even don’t believe that white foreigners are not minorities, even though bill of rights provides clear protection to foreigners via protection for national origin.
This character just demonstrated a racist attack and didn’t even realize that.

Added: my observation is that these attacks happen mostly by anti-racist liberals. I’ve been attacked a couple of times by conservatives too, but once you start pointing out racism they tend to remove their posts, some even apologize. Righteous lefties just keep drumming up their attacks in response.

 

And I read somewhere that more blacks commit crimes than whites, therefore they are all criminals. And Jews cannot be trusted because they’ll always steal.

I never had a problem with interracial relationships. I advocate personal responsibility and accountability. Thanks for demonstrating your racism.
@PARTIZAN1 - you might want to read this, my liberal Ukrainian friend. Your liberal buds just can’t help it! You are a racist!

 

Well said.

 

There you go again with your racism and bigotry, Polak.

 

Enjoy your special status and government perks.

 

I am and never complain about the white privilege I enjoy.

I just wish all people got the same privileges. Male also, so I got to enjoy more things than females did also.

I feel no guilt either. But again, I want all people's to have the same privileges I get to enjoy. I am not selfish.

 

The black Africans are first-generation immigrants. They have no family link to the past which can enrich them.

 

You didn't. He wasn't complimenting you.

 

That would be that I'm-Gay candidate from Indiana. Democrat.

 

You seem to be knowledgeable yourself. Can I make judgement calls on how YOU appear? Or your problems?

 

Until some disease kills you it's a terrific way to meet girls.

 

Let's substitute the word achievement for privilege.

 

You are an Affirmative Action person, government take away from me and pays you.
I don't think you want white males have the same privilege you currently have.

 

I have had nothing taken away from me. I just told you alll the things I enjoy as a white male. And you enjoy them also.
Tell me specifically the gov't has take from you. Due to AA.

What do you mean, pays me? I am a white male. How do I get paid different than you?

 

THIS JUST IN FROM THE HOUSE OF STEPHANOPOULOS: Going to National Parks Is Racist, Declares ABC News.

“Dear Libs: You aren’t going to shame Americans into accepting collective responsibility for crimes they didn’t commit. You’re just going to alienate them, and they’re not going to listen to you when there are real problems to solve. I guess you want a Trump landslide in November, huh?”​

​

In the six weeks since a multiracial group of Minnesota cops killed George Floyd, America has learned all sorts of things about what caused the crime. It wasn’t just those cops’ fault, you see. It wasn’t just the responsibility of the city of Minneapolis or even the state of Minnesota. As it turns out, every white person in the world is responsible for Floyd’s death. That’s why we now need to tear down any statue of any historical figure who was Caucasian, even the guy who signed the Emancipation Proclamation. That’s why any white person who voices a black character on a cartoon show needs to step aside now. That’s why we need to expunge that episode of The Golden Girls where they wore mud masks and the dumb one said, “We’re not really black.” All of those things are racist. All of those things made those cops kill that guy.

And we’re just getting started. Everything that white people enjoy is racist, because they’re white people. Even going to national parks is racist now, because most of the people who go to national parks are white.

Seriously.




It’s racist to go to national parks, even though you’re not keeping anybody else from going there. It’s “self-segregation,” even though the parks are open to anyone who wants to go. And if you’re a white person, it’s your fault if people of color don’t want to go to the parks, especially if you’ve never done anything to hurt anybody. None of the black people interviewed by ABC News can point to any specific instance of racism, which is what’s so nefarious about white people. There’s nothing more racist than not being a racist.

The message is clear: Mother Nature is a white supremacist.

I really don’t understand why anybody should care about the racial breakdown of national park attendees, or what will be solved if we somehow force non-white people to go to national parks. This is just some white journos who are expected to file a story about racism, even if there’s no racism.

“If white people are bad, and lots of white people go to national parks… Hey, national parks are racist now!” It’s the opposite of journalism.

Somebody tells you that Lincoln didn’t really free the slaves? Well then, you need to one-up them and blurt out that Lincoln was an outright racist. Now tear down his statue or you’re a racist! It’s completely insane.

This is all going to have the opposite of the intended effect. Americans were already tired of being called racist for things we didn’t do, and now there’s no escaping it wherever we go. We’re fed up.

Dear Libs: You aren’t going to shame Americans into accepting collective responsibility for crimes they didn’t commit. You’re just going to alienate them, and they’re not going to listen to you.

 

If it did we have paid them back already..

 

I'm glad you laughed alone in your mom's basement again.

You posted rhetoric with no substance. It's like eating ice cream when you're hungry. What a waste.

The US has been successful because of it's social programs, not in spite of them. The proof is in the demographics. You have nothing to back up your claim of 22 trillion dollars wasted and you know it, and you know who else knows it? All those non-white people who don't vote for the candidates you support. People by nature are really good at identifying their own interests and perusing them.

 

So is this that unsupported rhetoric that you whined about? I don't see any proof even offered here. in 1960 the nation spent ~ 20% of all budgets on social programming. Today, that number is almost 80%. Overall, that translates into roughly $22T spent. And, just for clarity, which of those programs have been retired? Which of those programs spends less today than it did in 1960? What percentage of the US is supported by those programs? The answers to those questions are staggering. And while total percentages might be declining, the total number of recipients isn't. IT begs the question then, why aren't the programs successful? The answer is and always has been they cannot ever be successful for if they were. they would end. And given the staggering proportions of who actually benefits (hint, they are the government workers themselves) the most from these programs, they are unlikely if ever to get stopped. Even asking for trimming minute percentages of their budgets motivates the left towards civil war. And that actually is the game that you seemingly are unable to see here. So, riddle me this. Citizens who are minorities that live in cities run by democrats live in poverty and squalor and yet, they continue to vote for the very folks who maintain them in that condition. Purposeful? Absolutely. Rational? Hardly. Explain how maintainable poverty is a goal not something to be solved? That is the question for democrats who have UNIVERSALLY always needed dependence on them for their power. It hasn't changed a bit since they managed slavery.

 

Sigh.

The US population has gone from roughly 186,000,000 to about 331,000,000 since 1960. That alone means the NUMBER of recipients will rise given the population has nearly doubled. That's just arithmetic. But if you want to get into why the numbers haven't gone away, how about the American wage since 1960? What has it done for American workers? I'll do some more heavy lifting for you. The average American wage in 1960 in TODAY's dollars was $20.27. Today, that wage is $22.65. Corporate profits from 1960, and you must agree as a capitalist/corporatist you are that profit is the best measure of efficiency of an economy, have grown at the least 6% almost every year since 1960. So, what you are seeing is corporations getting away with shifting the responsibility of paying their workers to those social programs. And before you claim they wouldn't do that if the programs didn't exist, wages weren't growing any higher prior to YOUR hand picked start point of 1960. They had some years of higher growth post 1960, and many more years of decline after.

https://www.epi.org/publication/ib364-corporate-tax-rates-and-economic-growth/
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-ta...rs-real-wages-have-barely-budged-for-decades/
https://www.macrotrends.net/countries/USA/united-states/life-expectancy


Wages are what workers live on. Social programs are the buffer between living and suffering a shortage of things we deem critical for living in our society, housing, food, water, etc. Obviously, there is a LOT more societal data one can sift through to draw conclusions. I picked these economic ones because money talks. If you want to keep going, go for it. Also, the data I used above you can easily validate with google. So the data shows that those programs are more and more vital and your cherished values aren't doing anything to make them go away. Also, NO ONE but you claimed that the programs were designed to go away once the problems were solved. That was YOUR definition of success. It's not documented anywhere else.

Old people will NEVER be fully employed due to discrimination by employers and forcing them to rely on companies to ensure their savings don't get wiped out in the form of 401k's is ineffective. So social programs are a must. Unless you'd rather people live much shorter lives, which they did, in 1960 by almost 10 years, and the further you go back in time, when there were fewer social programs, well you guessed it, lives were even shorter. So it's your choice, shorter, harder lives, or social programs. If you feel you can decide for people, great. But given the majority have decided against you, I think it's only ego and arrogance that would let you think somehow you know better than the majority on this one. I'm sure you still think you do, however.

So there you go, data and numbers. I don't expect much back other than more blah blah blah, but if you've got something else to offer, that would be great. Oh, and all the data says white people do better in this country too, so don't forget that given the topic of the thread. Do you need me to pull that data for you too...?

 

Die yourself black for a few days and I'm certain you'll get an answer to your question!!!