Social Justice Literature

[Thyunda]

This is the discrimination I campaign against. This is the bullshit I will not let slide. This is what I mean when I say 'white privilege'. Just how does a non-white get through this kind of discrimination? There are three political groups aimed solely at the white-washing of Britain, and you want me to consider asking the victims to work through their prejudices?

Are you kidding? Of all the dodgy UKIP policies to attack (climate change denial), these are the ones you go after?

-End mass uncontrolled immigration

What's wrong with this exactly? We shouldn't let every untrained idiot into our country, be they black or white, Christian or Muslim. If they want to come over here then they should be able to contribute in a meaningful way.

And what's more, most Brits want less immigration:

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/01/07/uk-britain-immigration-survey-idUKBREA0600F20140107

-Regain control of our borders

Not sure whether this refers to leaving the EU (To stop the free movement of people) or stopping illegal immigration.

If it refers to leaving the EU, then what's the big deal? The free movement of people lets anyone in, regardless of how skilled they. Criminals are freely allowed entrance as well. Even if it was just because of stopping 'durty forreners', I wouldn't call it racist. Most of the people coming into the UK from the EU are white.

If it refers to stopping illegal immigration then I so no problem there whatsoever.

-End Abuse of the Asylum system

Again, nothing wrong with this. We shouldn't be letting in a bunch of unskilled people. Whats more, refugees are supposed to stay in their first safe port of call, which probably isn't Britain.

-Introduce work permits with limited visas

What's wrong with this?

-Promote one common British culture

Is this a problem exactly? If you move to Britain then surely you should act in a British manner? Surely you should respect local customs? Multiculturalism has lead to ghettos popping up everywhere, where people just build a smaller version of their home country rather than adapting and integrating to their new one.

I attacked this one because it was relevant to the topic at hand. I could have gone after the aircraft carriers, but that wouldn't have had much to do with 'white privilege', now would it? But y'know what, I'll bite.

http://www.workpermit.com/news/2013-11-12/immigrants-to-uk-have-contributed-25bn-since-2000

Your turn.

Oh, and as for the British culture? What the everloving fuck is British culture? Why is it wrong to build a mosque in Britain? Why is it wrong to build three hundred? We have Catholic churches, don't we? A little bit fucking weird for a historically Protestant country, isn't it? And uh, just why is it okay for those dirty Irish Catholics to have kids over here? They belong in Ireland on their farms, not in good old civilised England.
I made a friend in England. He was French. I had to send him back to France because the war's still going on.

Or wait, am I just quoting random bits of history and pretending like they're still relevant? Let's see you offer a better definition.

 

[Areloch]

Fair point on the difference between racial privilege and sexuality privilege, though I don't imagine the distinction is large enough to matter on a whole.

Well, the way they work tends to be different, and of different severity as well. People who are a minority both ways have had a lot to say about the subject.

If nothing else, you can tell if someone is black or white at a glance, but that's not the same with sexuality. Currently, it seems worldwide, there are a lot more laws against gay people than black people, though.

Yeah, that's fair. I was mostly meaning that any privileges derived would either apply themselves in the situation in question, or they would not, such as a job interview. But yes, they are different.

A white person has privilege for being white, but only if they're in a place where that would do anything at all, such as if they lived in a primarily white area. Hence, the majority part.

The west, as a rule, is majority white. The people in various forms of power in the west tend to be white.

Now, certainly, this doesn't make white privilege such a thing in, say, Japan, but the US, Canada, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and so on are most definitely places where white people have privilege.

Like said above, privilege only enters into play and matters if you're in a position to benefit from any theoretical privilege you may have. If I'm a white guy living in a neighborhood that is all black, I don't get any societal benefits at all from it. In fact, I run a higher risk of being slighted for being white and other black people being picked over me. The circumstantial settings would dictate a black privilege.

A black neighbourhood in a country primarily populated by, and dominated by, white people? You still have white privilege. It might not be worth so much in that neighbourhood, sure, but that neighbourhood doesn't exist in isolation.

Hmm. A question. If I was living in an almost exclusively black neighborhood for whatever reason, and went to stores ran by the people that live there, and thus any jobs I get would be interviewed and managed by the people that live there - black - what white privileges would I have?
I wouldn't be guaranteed a job there because I'm white over someone of a different race, I wouldn't be paid more either. There's no special 'white kids' college scholarships and so on. So what advantages in that situation would my being white derive?

I really can't think of any off the top of my head, and that's what I mean. Sure, if I got a job "in the city" or whatever outside the neighborhood, it'd be different, but inside that space where I'm the minority, I don't know what privileges would apply that I'd have elsewhere.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Hmm. A question. If I was living in an almost exclusively black neighborhood for whatever reason, and went to stores ran by the people that live there, and thus any jobs I get would be interviewed and managed by the people that live there - black - what white privileges would I have?
I wouldn't be guaranteed a job there because I'm white over someone of a different race, I wouldn't be paid more either. There's no special 'white kids' college scholarships and so on. So what advantages in that situation would my being white derive?

I really can't think of any off the top of my head, and that's what I mean. Sure, if I got a job "in the city" or whatever outside the neighborhood, it'd be different, but inside that space where I'm the minority, I don't know what privileges would apply that I'd have elsewhere.

Ah, I see what you mean now.

No, in that particular instance, they would not.

To go a step further, privilege isn't always a good thing for the privileged anyway. Assuming one group to be superior has problems, such as the expectation that that group should be. Real men don't cry, and all.

For that matter, assuming gay people to be lesser meant that many nations wouldn't allow openly gay people to serve in their militaries (at least until this was changed). Which meant that they didn't end up dying in whatever war was going on. Admittedly, the proportions of people dying because of this particular example isn't very large.

 

[Areloch]

Hmm. A question. If I was living in an almost exclusively black neighborhood for whatever reason, and went to stores ran by the people that live there, and thus any jobs I get would be interviewed and managed by the people that live there - black - what white privileges would I have?
I wouldn't be guaranteed a job there because I'm white over someone of a different race, I wouldn't be paid more either. There's no special 'white kids' college scholarships and so on. So what advantages in that situation would my being white derive?

I really can't think of any off the top of my head, and that's what I mean. Sure, if I got a job "in the city" or whatever outside the neighborhood, it'd be different, but inside that space where I'm the minority, I don't know what privileges would apply that I'd have elsewhere.

Ah, I see what you mean now.

No, in that particular instance, they would not.

To go a step further, privilege isn't always a good thing for the privileged anyway. Assuming one group to be superior has problems, such as the expectation that that group should be. Real men don't cry, and all.

For that matter, assuming gay people to be lesser meant that many nations wouldn't allow openly gay people to serve in their militaries (at least until this was changed). Which meant that they didn't end up dying in whatever war was going on. Admittedly, the proportions of people dying because of this particular example isn't very large.

Yeah.

The REAL problem? Society is HARD

The biggest issue with throwing stuff like "white privilege" around is it's, as far as I've seen, ALWAYS used as a lazy cudgel to induce guilt and a sense of superiority for those that aren't white.

Like we've talked about here though, is that any privilege held by any given party is contextual, and even then doesn't guarantee it's a GOOD thing, as you say above.

That's why I think something like "Majority Privilege" is probably as close to what we want to talk about as we can get without adding 4 miles of appendices to it. The name implies that privileges you have are derived from being aligned to the majority in your current circumstance.

If you're white in a white area, then sure, you probably have some boons. If you're gay at a gay bar? You're probably rocking that something fierce. But if you're outside that aligned space, it at best means nothing, and at worst is reversed entirely.

 

[Thaluikhain]

The REAL problem? Society is HARD

Yup.

The biggest issue with throwing stuff like "white privilege" around is it's, as far as I've seen, ALWAYS used as a lazy cudgel to induce guilt and a sense of superiority for those that aren't white.

I disagree there. Now, often a lazy cudgel, sure. But I can't blame people for getting angry with people immersed in their privilege. There's a constant barrage of exactly the same stuff from many people refusing to get it.

OTOH, taken in good faith, if someone doesn't get it, but doesn't want to, being told they should check their privilege is useful. Not pleasant, I've had this happen to me more than once, but it is something I'd like to feel I've learnt from.

I've never seen it done to induce guilt. Guilt is worthless...next time there's a discussion about some discrimination or oppression caused by members of a group you are in, don't give any useful input, or just sit their and listen to others, chime in to say that you personally feel guilty, and see what the response is.

[small]Don't actually do this[/small]

If you're white in a white area, then sure, you probably have some boons. If you're gay at a gay bar? You're probably rocking that something fierce. But if you're outside that aligned space, it at best means nothing, and at worst is reversed entirely.

Well...yes. But, taking the gay bar as an example. There's a bit of a kerfuffle about straight people in gay bars. A lot of people think that straight people should stay the hell out (which I tend to agree with), and there's some straight people saying that that is unfair and discriminatory.

A gay person in a gay bar has some vague privilege, I guess. But, more or less the entire rest of the world is heteronormative. That's one of the very few public places gay people can go which is gay dominated. Everywhere else, everywhere that actually really matters, is dominated by straight people and straight privilege.

Sure, context matters, but, I'm going to think it's fair to ignore gay privilege, and claim straight privilege is the only and always existing one, even if there are some rare and nebulous exceptions.

(If we are talking about straight vs gay. If we are talking about gay vs bi...lots of prominent gay people and groups rabidly hate bisexuals.)

 

[Genocidicles]

I attacked this one because it was relevant to the topic at hand. I could have gone after the aircraft carriers, but that wouldn't have had much to do with 'white privilege', now would it? But y'know what, I'll bite.

http://www.workpermit.com/news/2013-11-12/immigrants-to-uk-have-contributed-25bn-since-2000

Your turn.

It's irrelevant how much immigrants have contributed. Most people want less immigration, and a democracy should serve the needs of it's people.

Oh, and as for the British culture? What the everloving fuck is British culture?

Asking this is like a fish asking what water is. You're so immersed in it that you're not even aware of it. Presumably you could point out American culture, French culture, Turkish culture etc though?

The libraries full of literature we've contributed to the world is part of our culture. The artwork, films, television programs. Football, Cricket and Rugby. Keeping a stiff upper lip and the whole 'Keep calm, carry on' thing. Even the stereotypical crap, like the royal family, big ben, fish and chips and grumbling about the weather... even that is British culture.

Why is it wrong to build a mosque in Britain? Why is it wrong to build three hundred?

It's not wrong. What is wrong is to consider yourself a muslim first, British second.

We have Catholic churches, don't we? A little bit fucking weird for a historically Protestant country, isn't it? And uh, just why is it okay for those dirty Irish Catholics to have kids over here? They belong in Ireland on their farms, not in good old civilised England.
I made a friend in England. He was French. I had to send him back to France because the war's still going on.

I don't even know what you're doing here. UKIP doesn't hate foreigners, they just don't want unskilled ones coming to the country.

 

[Areloch]

The REAL problem? Society is HARD

Yup.

The biggest issue with throwing stuff like "white privilege" around is it's, as far as I've seen, ALWAYS used as a lazy cudgel to induce guilt and a sense of superiority for those that aren't white.

I disagree there. Now, often a lazy cudgel, sure. But I can't blame people for getting angry with people immersed in their privilege. There's a constant barrage of exactly the same stuff from many people refusing to get it.

OTOH, taken in good faith, if someone doesn't get it, but doesn't want to, being told they should check their privilege is useful. Not pleasant, I've had this happen to me more than once, but it is something I'd like to feel I've learnt from.

I've never seen it done to induce guilt. Guilt is worthless...next time there's a discussion about some discrimination or oppression caused by members of a group you are in, don't give any useful input, or just sit their and listen to others, chime in to say that you personally feel guilty, and see what the response is.

[small]Don't actually do this[/small]

Well, I think the problem with the cudgel approach is if people don't get it already, hitting them with something so poorly explained/defined doesn't help at all.

For the longest time, all I saw of the whole privilege thing was demands to 'check your privilege'. Which if you don't know what that means already tells me literally nothing. Saying "stop and think about how lucky you are" or something to the effect is a lot more informative about what they should actually be thinking about while also not smashing them in the face with it.

And the whole 'guilt' thing, I mean in terms of it's used to cause guilt, not that it actually does. Take the tumblr extremist usage of 'check your privilege'. It's clearly not used in an attempt to get people to think, but a stick to hit you with in an attempt to make you feel bad/inferior. This is decidedly the wrong way to do it. Even if most people using the term don't use it this way, you can't ignore the crazy posters wielding the term to everyone else's detriment.

If you're white in a white area, then sure, you probably have some boons. If you're gay at a gay bar? You're probably rocking that something fierce. But if you're outside that aligned space, it at best means nothing, and at worst is reversed entirely.

Well...yes. But, taking the gay bar as an example. There's a bit of a kerfuffle about straight people in gay bars. A lot of people think that straight people should stay the hell out (which I tend to agree with), and there's some straight people saying that that is unfair and discriminatory.

A gay person in a gay bar has some vague privilege, I guess. But, more or less the entire rest of the world is heteronormative. That's one of the very few public places gay people can go which is gay dominated. Everywhere else, everywhere that actually really matters, is dominated by straight people and straight privilege.

Sure, context matters, but, I'm going to think it's fair to ignore gay privilege, and claim straight privilege is the only and always existing one, even if there are some rare and nebulous exceptions.

(If we are talking about straight vs gay. If we are talking about gay vs bi...lots of prominent gay people and groups rabidly hate bisexuals.)

I didn't mean they're on the same "level" or anything, but as you point out there with the gay bar example(I've never been to one, so I didn't realize this was actually a thing), a straight person can be discriminated against for just being there(maybe they're helping their gay friend as a wingman, who knows).
But them being straight doesn't gain them a thing, and could potentially be a negative. That's what I was going for with mentioning the gay bar situation.

In society as a whole? Absolutely, they're massively disadvantaged overall, but if a straight person is in a gay bar for whatever reason and they're getting harangued by the other patrons for being straight, they're probably not thinking "Pft, whatever, I'm going to go to work tomorrow where I'll be better off than them".
They're probably thinking "what did I do?". At the time, in the context, they don't benefit from any privilege.

It all goes back to the context. Like I said, it's an imperfect label with the 'majority privilege' but it's probably the best we'll get without going into specifics for each situation.

Also, yeah, the whole 'gay people hating bisexuals' thing just confuses me. Like, conceptually it's no different than straight people hating on gays, but...hm.

 

[Thyunda]

-snip-

Why don't you try asking people why they don't like immigration? You'll quickly find their problems with immigration are rarely founded on reality, and are usually based on the statements made by parties like UKIP. Wanna know why you're poor? Immigrants. Look at all this nice countryside. Know who hates countryside? Immigrants.

Is it wrong to consider yourself Muslim before British? I wasn't aware that the two were mutually exclusive. I can point out a couple of American stereotypes to you, or some French ones, but ultimately what you'll find is that our cultures are infinitely malleable and not only is it physically impossible to 'enforce a culture', it's also philosophically nonsense. Like Britain First portraying British soldiers as crusaders and plastering Jesus onto half their posters. It's fuckin nonsense. A democracy can only serve the needs of the people if it's not actively misleading those people, and actively misleading those people is exactly what UKIP does.

 

[someperson1984]

I'd hardly call this book academia. Saying someone is born with some inherent responsibility or advantage for the simple reason they're white is the exact same racism as saying someone is born with an inherent disadvantage because they're black, or asian, or whatever.

Saying someone has a societal advantage or disadvantage because of their race or gender isn't racism or sexism, but rather an acknowledgement of the pressures and prejudices ingrained in people by a society that still hasn't fully moved on from its history of open and accepted discrimination. It's not really the fault of a child born white and male that, in general, American culture will treat them better than someone who is a woman/person of color. It's just the way the system was set up by men long dead, and we as a society need to learn to move past it.

It IS racist/sexist because that claim is hilariously generalized to the point where it has to be false, i.e (to quote some tumblr blogs...blech) "all men are racists/mysoginsts/abusers"

Privilege and racism/sexism are two different things. The former deals with how world interacts with someone, the latter deals with how someone interacts with the world.

And trying to say "All white people ever are privilege" is infact a racist notion.

No it isn't, but I think did a poor job explaining what privilege is. White male privilege doesn't mean "you will automatically have a better life because you are a white male". I said in my original response that American culture will generally treat white men then others was incorrect, and I apologize for the confusion. What I should have said is that white men will not have to deal with the institutional racism/sexism that has been ingrained within American culture. At least, not nearly on the same level that and woman/POC will have to deal with.


And on a side note, I would like to apologize for helping derail this thread. I'm done, unless I come up with a viable answer to the original post.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Well, I think the problem with the cudgel approach is if people don't get it already, hitting them with something so poorly explained/defined doesn't help at all.

True...though, everywhere I've seen that is about discussing this tends to have an FAQ or required reading people are supposed to read first.

Something of an extreme example: http://www.shakesville.com/2010/01/feminism-101.html

Before discussing anything on that site, you are supposed to read everything linked to there. It's not unreasonable for people to expect a minimum level of understanding of the issue they are discussing.

And the whole 'guilt' thing, I mean in terms of it's used to cause guilt, not that it actually does. Take the tumblr extremist usage of 'check your privilege'. It's clearly not used in an attempt to get people to think, but a stick to hit you with in an attempt to make you feel bad/inferior. This is decidedly the wrong way to do it. Even if most people using the term don't use it this way, you can't ignore the crazy posters wielding the term to everyone else's detriment.

Firstly, I disagree with the use of "check your privilege".

Secondly, again, what's the point of causing guilt? That doesn't get anyone anywhere, even if you could do it.

Absolutely, they're massively disadvantaged overall, but if a straight person is in a gay bar for whatever reason and they're getting harangued by the other patrons for being straight, they're probably not thinking "Pft, whatever, I'm going to go to work tomorrow where I'll be better off than them".
They're probably thinking "what did I do?". At the time, in the context, they don't benefit from any privilege.

Yes, but it's their privilege that is making them feel like that. One place that caters to people that aren't them is only shocking because they've been brought up to assume everywhere caters to them.

So let's say, I, as a white dude, lived in a mostly black neighborhood. I'd be very fortunate to find a job due to the fact I'd be percieved as an outsider to the norm. As I said, "White priviledge" in action. Some people just have naturally easier times in their own climate. It's kind of like how boats work well in water and little else. White dudes generally have an easier time in populations of mostly white dudes. In the same vein, black women have easier times in communites of-you guessed it-mostly black women. It's not some sort of privilege. It's just solidarity, a trait which has been in human beings since the dawn of time.

Solidarity...that's not an unreasonable way of putting it, but that's hardly mutually exclusive with privilege.

Secondly, yes, there are black communities in which white privilege is much less likely to apply. However, if they are in the west, they are in countries dominated by white privilege. The industrial, governmental, judicial, religious etc centres of that nation are very unlikely to also be black communities.

 

[Thaluikhain]

The problem with this "white privilge" thing is that it's very very hard to generalize human beings. "All white people in the west have an easier time". That's just straight up not true.

But that's not (quite) what privilege is. It's a set of unfair advantages various groups have been given by society. It doesn't guarantee you a good life, or a better life than a given person from another group.

Secondly, the terminology is almost exsclusively used to shame or degrade someone into not disagreeing with you.

Its not, it's really, really not.

In any case, even if it was, that doesn't mean the concept is flawed, it's just being abused. If we should stop using words and ideas because people on tumblr are trolling with them, well...

 

[Areloch]

Well, I think the problem with the cudgel approach is if people don't get it already, hitting them with something so poorly explained/defined doesn't help at all.

True...though, everywhere I've seen that is about discussing this tends to have an FAQ or required reading people are supposed to read first.

Something of an extreme example: http://www.shakesville.com/2010/01/feminism-101.html

Before discussing anything on that site, you are supposed to read everything linked to there. It's not unreasonable for people to expect a minimum level of understanding of the issue they are discussing.

Fair enough. I tend to stay reaaaaally far away from these kinds of discussions because it turns toxic enough to eat through my floor. But somewhere like, here, lets say, doesn't really have a helpful 101 like that. If someone dropped a "check your privilege" in a thread, it's not unreasonable to believe a new poster may not understand what you're referring to. In short, you know what happens when you assume

But yeah, depending on WHERE that's brought up, it could easily be a known language and thus not unusual.

And the whole 'guilt' thing, I mean in terms of it's used to cause guilt, not that it actually does. Take the tumblr extremist usage of 'check your privilege'. It's clearly not used in an attempt to get people to think, but a stick to hit you with in an attempt to make you feel bad/inferior. This is decidedly the wrong way to do it. Even if most people using the term don't use it this way, you can't ignore the crazy posters wielding the term to everyone else's detriment.

Firstly, I disagree with the use of "check your privilege".

Secondly, again, what's the point of causing guilt? That doesn't get anyone anywhere, even if you could do it.

I went to dig up some example posts I've seen on tumblr, but honestly it got physically painful after a while.
When I say they do that, at BEST they're trolling, and at worst, saying horrible things to be horrible(akin to "black people were better off as slaves" sort of rhetoric). Those type of posts I've seen aren't intended to get anyone anywhere.
The reason I brought it up, even though the people that make posts like that clearly have some pretty heavy problems, is that's the kind of chaff that hurts your point if you're using the term correctly. When used correctly, pointing out someone's white/black/straight/martian privilege is a valid point, intended to help them reflect.

When used incorrectly, it's basically just making everyone hate the phrase "white privilege" and gets people to tune out the second they see it. Which destroys it's usefulness. I'm not at all implying rational people use it that way, but it's being used that way the same.

What did Yahtzee call it? The "man covered in shit" effect?

Absolutely, they're massively disadvantaged overall, but if a straight person is in a gay bar for whatever reason and they're getting harangued by the other patrons for being straight, they're probably not thinking "Pft, whatever, I'm going to go to work tomorrow where I'll be better off than them".
They're probably thinking "what did I do?". At the time, in the context, they don't benefit from any privilege.

Yes, but it's their privilege that is making them feel like that. One place that caters to people that aren't them is only shocking because they've been brought up to assume everywhere caters to them.

Right. But at the same time, in that situation, your privilege is...mm, 'irrelevent' seems the wrong phrase, but the only frame of reference you have is suddenly you're wrong and the bad guy. Even if it's derived from having the luck of not being in that situation before, that doesn't really help you when it does happen simply because that's not at all what you're going to think of.
In reverse, if a black person was getting screwed over by the system, and moved into a all-black community, he wouldn't think "haha, the tables have turned! Now I have the privilege!", they'll think "well at least these people treat me right".

I guess what I'm meaning is that outside of a pointed debate like this, I'd imagine just about no one thinks about 'privilege'. Weither it's for or against them.

So let's say, I, as a white dude, lived in a mostly black neighborhood. I'd be very fortunate to find a job due to the fact I'd be percieved as an outsider to the norm. As I said, "White priviledge" in action. Some people just have naturally easier times in their own climate. It's kind of like how boats work well in water and little else. White dudes generally have an easier time in populations of mostly white dudes. In the same vein, black women have easier times in communites of-you guessed it-mostly black women. It's not some sort of privilege. It's just solidarity, a trait which has been in human beings since the dawn of time.

Solidarity...that's not an unreasonable way of putting it, but that's hardly mutually exclusive with privilege.

Secondly, yes, there are black communities in which white privilege is much less likely to apply. However, if they are in the west, they are in countries dominated by white privilege. The industrial, governmental, judicial, religious etc centres of that nation are very unlikely to also be black communities.

I dunno about religious establishments, as in tightly knit black communities, you can definitely have mostly/all black churches.
As for the other ones, lets say you get a job in the community, and don't run afoul of the law. Would any non-privilege for those black people, privileges that white people conceivably would have, matter to them at all?

Sure, if they left that space/context it would. But if they don't, it doesn't really exist. It wouldn't really be different from living in a different country with different cultural rules. That's why I feel context is important for this sort of thing.

Also, this has been a surprisingly pleasant, level-headed back and forth on a normally terrible topic

 

[Thaluikhain]

Fair enough. I tend to stay reaaaaally far away from these kinds of discussions because it turns toxic enough to eat through my floor. But somewhere like, here, lets say, doesn't really have a helpful 101 like that. If someone dropped a "check your privilege" in a thread, it's not unreasonable to believe a new poster may not understand what you're referring to. In short, you know what happens when you assume

But yeah, depending on WHERE that's brought up, it could easily be a known language and thus not unusual.

I guess so, though I guess I'm hoping that people who don't understand what's being talked about would either google things or avoid sticking their oars in. Bit too much to hope, though.

I guess what I'm meaning is that outside of a pointed debate like this, I'd imagine just about no one thinks about 'privilege'. Weither it's for or against them.

I'd very much disagree with that. Now, they might not think about it in those terms, but if society is discriminating against you, you can't avoid thinking about it.

If it's discriminating against someone else, very easy, of course.

I dunno about religious establishments, as in tightly knit black communities, you can definitely have mostly/all black churches.
As for the other ones, lets say you get a job in the community, and don't run afoul of the law. Would any non-privilege for those black people, privileges that white people conceivably would have, matter to them at all?

Sure, if they left that space/context it would. But if they don't, it doesn't really exist. It wouldn't really be different from living in a different country with different cultural rules. That's why I feel context is important for this sort of thing.

Even still, there are problems. The wider society still has a lot to do with it. Even if you hide in your black community forever, and keep outsiders out (and how many actually do that?), the government outside gets to decide who gets, for example, funding. What if a natural disaster hits, and the federal government doesn't see your town as a priority? Or a priority for anything else. People get elected on the backs of rhetoric against your group.

Then there's the cultural stuff. You turn on the TV, and you see people that look like you starring as "Thug #2". Or your daughter tells you she feels ugly because her idea of beauty is based on Disney Princesses and Barbie dolls with pale skin and straight hair. If she goes to a school with a curriculum set by people outside the community, she gets to learn about the achievements of dead white guys, and so on.

Now, this is just off the top of my head, complaints that I remember people in those sorts of situations making. I've not lived through any of this myself, there'd be a lot more if I had.

In my country, we have lots of remote Aboriginal communities that are mostly or entirely populated by Aboriginal people. The government on the other side of the continent decides what happens to them, and does not need to consult at all. Things are horrific, and will continue to be so indefinitely. Now, these communities often tried to run themselves as totally separate regions, I believe, but weren't allowed to.

Also, this has been a surprisingly pleasant, level-headed back and forth on a normally terrible topic

Shh, you'll jinx it.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Ok let me fix that.

"All white people in the west have advantages". See how -still- racist and generalized that is?

Nope. Now, you might want to specify what advantages and why, but white people definitely do have advantages in western societies.

 

[Thaluikhain]

Ok let me fix that.

"All white people in the west have advantages". See how -still- racist and generalized that is?

Nope. Now, you might want to specify what advantages and why, but white people definitely do have advantages in western societies.

YOU fuckin tell me the "advantages". You're the one who supposes they exsist. The burden of proof lies with the claimant.

I meant that while the statement "All white people in the west have advantages" may be criticised for being vague, it isn't racist.